C.H. Spurgeon Calls "Answers in Genesis" to Repentance

Although, I support Answers in Genesis stance against the Darwinist faith and the religion of NeoAtheism, the dubious apologetics of AIG has reached a new low. I can't hold back a public rebuke because they conspired to distort the sermons of the great Christian Pastor CH Spurgeon.

Pastor Spurgeon had no problem with the Earth being millions of years old and his sermons and books lead me to believe he held the Gap theory point of view which I happen to share.

This is from a sermon The Power of the Holy Ghost, June 17, 1855 by Spurgeon delivered in dated June 17 1855, which was before the publication of The Origin of Species, so the criticism that it is a compromise with the theory of Evolution is invalid.

I quote Pastor Spurgeon:

"We know not how remote the period of the creation of this globe may be-certainly many millions of years before the time of Adam. Our planet has passed through various stages of existence, and different kinds of creatures have lived on its surface, all of which have been fashioned by God."

Spurgeon, C. H. (1998). Vol. 1: Spurgeon's Sermons: Volume 1 (electronic ed.). Logos Library System; Spurgeon's Sermons. Albany, OR: Ages Software.

I happen to have all of 63 volumes of Spurgeons sermons in my libronix library so I know I have the original correct unaltered version. Apparently, the young-Earth organization Answers in Genesis doesnt want its readers to know that 19th century preacher Charles Spurgeon had no problem with an Earth that is millions of years old.

Compare the real version http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/0030.htm

With the Answers in Genesis version: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/02/26/power-of-holy-ghost

"For His invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse." (Ro 1:20)

AIG is giving men an excuse. Dishonest apologetics and creation science brings disgrace to Christianity and fuels Atheism. Please call AIG to repent and post a public apology.

For Honest Creation Science:

http://www.reasons.org/

http://www.godandscience.org/

http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/creation-questions/SC-creation-ques...

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Answers in Genesis
• Calvinism
• Spurgeon
• Creationism
• Atheism
• Young Earth
• Ken Hamm
• Kent Hovind
• Evolution
• Darwinism
• Charles Haddon Spurgeon
• Dr Dino

[Stan6468]

There is no doubt one must be honest. When we look at scriptures honestly and take it for what it says. The world and the animal kingdom is definetly young and I mean that literally because if one believes in old age and old dinosaurs and they died then comes Adam then Christ death was a lie. Bible says death entered the world when Adam sinned and the sin affected creation. The Earth is young and the dinosaurs lived among men and the evidence is there. Christ is Alive not in vain.

[tallliza]

@sparky6025 Nothing in this world is perfect. Sporadic favoritism etc. is not excluded anywhere. But to claim a cover up by the scientists in general, in the apropriate fields , is plain nonsense. The best way to avoid bias and phony claims is PEER REVIEW. There is nothing else. If you see a better way, I want to hear it.

[sparky6025]

@tallliza: “…but how biased can you be in sciences ?” In true science there should be no bias, but there is. It is unavoidable, intrinsic; only the honest will admit it. Evo theory, which is not true science, is nothing but bias. All branches of even true science are subject to at least a minimum of bias interpretation based on pre-conceived beliefs or worldviews. Everyone has a worldview or set of preconceived ideas upon which the data is interpreted, even Stein & Bergman. No neutral!

[tallliza]

@sparky6025 CONTINUED... There is no such thing as a neutral unbiased position. What you believe determines how you act... You might be right, in religious or theological questions, but how biased can you be in sciences ? Tell me how you can be biased in Mathematics, Astronomy. physics, biology etc. And if you maintain what you said, doesn`t that apply to Ben Stein and Jerry Bergman ? Or are those above suspicion ?

[tallliza]

@sparky6025 You are nuts, man. What better system as to open your findings to review by colleagues ? Maybe. in your view, they should ask religious leaders for their opinion. Who else is there to evaluate somebody`s conclusions then scientists from the same branche of science. Your conspiracy theory is INSANE. 540.000 scientists in conspiracy to cover-up WHAT ??. ... There is no such thing as a neutral unbiased position. What you believe determines how you act.. You are NUTS.>>> CONTINUED

[sparky6025]

@tallliza: Why yes, evo theory IS laughable! I agree! True Science proves itself right or wrong -self correcting. Evo pseudoscience cannot and does not.. Evo is open to peer review ...Evo’s peer reviewing other Evo's, is like liars confirming other liars. Paradigms are the norm. There is no such thing as a neutral unbiased position. What you believe determines how you act.

[sparky6025]

@tallliza: " evolution is not true science, nor does it fulfill the requirements of scientific method -especially empirical observation and Falsifiability" -I agree entirely! "Evolution was never proven wrong." -exactly my point! ...thus, it is not falsifiable per scientific method! Obviously you don't comprehend the scientific concept of "Falsifiable." Oh, and BTW, it has not and cannot be proven correct either. You 'believe" it takes 'millions of years,' that's faith, not observable science.

[sparky6025]

@tallliza: conspiracy never happens ...yea, right. "Those few nitwits..."? Your bias is now also showing. There is no such thing as a neutral position. I never claimed there was. It is a fact, no 'assumption' needed. ..especially your assumptions. Yes, science keeps moving on, while evo is a dead end on a one-way street. "kickbacks"? -more of your assumptions. I am not your 'friend.' Your pathological narcissism is easy to see.

[tallliza]

@sparky6025 : Well, my friend, keep up your conspiracy theory. Inspite of all the conspiracy(????) in science, science moves on. Those few nitwitts will not stop it. I am sure they make good money from their pseudo-discent with mainstream science.. ....Peer review accepts only 1 paradigm -the evo paradigm... That is your own biased assumption without any evidence. Maybe in some way, your support of the conspiracy theory helps you to some kickbacks too. Who knows ?

[sparky6025]

@tallliza: When all else fails, resort to ad hominem! How typical. What took you so long? BTW, once again, Evo is not true science. Stein and Bergman DID defend their claims with OVERWHELMING scientific documentation -per the TRUE scientific method! Peer Review is the fox guarding the henhouse; tantamount to expecting a pathological liar to tell the truth. Peer review accepts only 1 paradigm -the evo paradigm. It could not be more bias. Good science seeks the truth no matter where it leads.