The Ark Encounter has opened!!

[Hera]

2 hours ago, catlady said:

I googled "unicorns in the bible" and apparently as late as 1828, the primary definition of "unicorn" was rhinoceros.  There was a lot of interesting discussion about translations and timelines of various translations.  Did Ken Ham's team do *any* research?

This is rhetorical, right?  

[catlady]

33 minutes ago, Hera said:

This is rhetorical, right?  

very much so!  I learned that bit about rhinoceros/unicorn in about 2 minutes on the google, so surely someone running a museum should have had access to that information, and then some!!

[purple_summer]

I was just in the area but I didn't even see a billboard for it. I had a vague thought of taking one for the team but I'm trying to love myself. 

 

For the  record, my fundie/fundie light family lives in the area and no one has paid to go to the creation museum. And we paid to visit the Holy Land Experience in Orlando....

[CyborgKin]

On 08/07/2016 at 9:34 PM, alexandracabot said:

Because it's completely possible to believe that the Bible is not literal but figurative, and not written by God but by men, and still be a devout Christian? You can take the lessons of Scripture and the life of Jesus very seriously and realize that the Bible was written thousands of years ago and intended as a spiritual guideline, not a factual handbook.

People who deny science in favor of the Bible do plenty of filtering of their own. Are they "caving in" when they eat shrimp or don't stone their kids to death for being disobedient? 

 

Believing the giving of the law to Israel was a historical event and believing it should be followed by Christians now are two different and separate issues.  I don't think it's inconsistent to take Genesis historically while eating shrimp and not stoning sinner.

 

I'm not saying Christians can't be devout while not taking Genesis as history.  But why give Jesus' words any weight when he said:

Quote

But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.  For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,  and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
Matthew 24:37‭-‬39 NKJV

And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man:  They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all.
Luke 17:26‭-‬27 NKJV

Or why trust anything Peter wrote as he also wrote:

Quote

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him.
I Peter 3:18‭-‬22 NKJV

For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one  of eight people , a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;
II Peter 2:4‭-‬5 NKJV

Why trust Luke, who wrote that Jesus was decended from Noah and Adam?

And without a historical Adam, what's the point of Jesus, and what hope is there for resurrection?

Quote

But now Christ is risen from the dead, and has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. For since by man came death, by Man also came the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.

So also is the resurrection of the dead. The  body is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption. It is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory. It is sown in weakness, it is raised in power. It is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, “The first man Adam became a living being.” The last Adam became  a life-giving spirit. However, the spiritual is not first, but the natural, and afterward the spiritual. The first man was of the earth, made of dust; the second Man is the Lord from heaven. As was the man of dust, so also are those who  are  made of dust; and as is the heavenly Man, so also are those who  are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the man of dust, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly Man.
I Corinthians 15:20‭-‬22‭, ‬42‭-‬49 NKJV

This kinda leaves 'being devout' as saying "Jesus said love one another as I have loved you, then died for no good reason, so let's love one another and hope it somehow works our alright in the end, even though Jesus thought Noah and fhe flood were real."

And Jesus must have been wrong about this too:  (also he was quoting Genesis)

Quote

And Jesus answered and said to them, “Because of the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.  But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’  ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife,  and the two shall become one flesh’ ; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh.  Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.”
Mark 10:5‭-‬9 NKJV

 

[PennySycamore]

My oldest daughter mentioned the Ark Encounter to me after we saw Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory a few weeks ago.  She thought it was totally ridiculous and did her sister.  I just hope that the sister between them doesn't stop when they are passing nearby (Cincy to Louisville) in a couple of weeks on their way home from the Adirondacks.  I doubt they will as they still have about 10 hours to drive.  Second daughter might eat it up even if her sisters don't. 

[alexandracabot]

1 hour ago, CyborgKin said:

 

Believing the giving of the law to Israel was a historical event and believing it should be followed by Christians now are two different and separate issues.  I don't think it's inconsistent to take Genesis historically while eating shrimp and not stoning sinner.

 

I'm not saying Christians can't be devout while not taking Genesis as history.  But why give Jesus' words any weight when he said:

Or why trust anything Peter wrote as he also wrote:

Why trust Luke, who wrote that Jesus was decended from Noah and Adam?

And without a historical Adam, what's the point of Jesus, and what hope is there for resurrection?

This kinda leaves 'being devout' as saying "Jesus said love one another as I have loved you, then died for no good reason, so let's love one another and hope it somehow works our alright in the end, even though Jesus thought Noah and fhe flood were real."

And Jesus must have been wrong about this too:  (also he was quoting Genesis)

 

Do you not understand what an allegorical interpretation of the Bible is? I'm not a Christian so I'm not going to argue theology I don't believe with you, but I think you're willfully misinterpreting a completely valid theology and worldview.

[The limit does not exist]

I've been watching the movies on Hallmark Channel since they're running all their Christmas rom-coms right now and I have a secret soft spot for bad acting and happily ever afters. There have been a couple mentions of the Ark Encounter during the commercial breaks. 

[Naga Viper]

9 hours ago, Hera said:

The unicorns really make the exhibit for me.  If you're going to go with a fantasy, might as well go big, I guess.

Well, hell, then I wish they'd done dragons, mermaids, and jackalopes too. And a big kraken hanging off the side eating the dodos.

[CyborgKin]

2 hours ago, alexandracabot said:

Do you not understand what an allegorical interpretation of the Bible is? I'm not a Christian so I'm not going to argue theology I don't believe with you, but I think you're willfully misinterpreting a completely valid theology and worldview.

I'm not certain how to correctly interpret this post.

[nausicaa]

On 7/9/2016 at 8:16 AM, LadyCrow1313 said:

I'm not a Christian, but I can't help what Pope Francis would think of such nonsense. He seems to be a fairly progressive man, right?

Well, considering the official stance of the Catholic Church is against YEC, he'd probably be laughing right along with us. 

 

(Some Catholic Church stances over the years:)

Spoiler

 

"The Catholic Church holds no official position on the theory of creation or evolution, leaving the specifics of either theistic evolution or literal creationism to the individual within certain parameters established by the Church. According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church, any believer may accept either literal or special creation within the period of an actual six-day, twenty-four-hour period, or they may accept the belief that the earth evolved over time under the guidance of God." 

"The International Theological Commission, headed by Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger who became the very conservative Pope Benedict XVI, held plenary sessions in Rome 2000-2002, and wrote a paper "Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God," published July 2004. It sided with an old earth." 

Bishop Francis X. DiLorenzo, chair of the Committee on Science and Human Values, wrote in a letter sent to all U.S. bishops in December 2004: "Catholic schools should continue teaching evolution as a scientific theory backed by convincing evidence."

 

So this is definitely an area where evangelicals and Catholics diverge. My guess is that before evolution became a hot button topic, Catholic universities and scientists had done enough research and work in this area that the cat was too far out of the bag to wrestle it back in once evolution was labeled a theological conundrum.

[THERetroGamerNY]

So we have raging gun violence... Global climate change... Trump... China and the South Sea... Desperate attempts to get people to realize that black lives matter... Drought... Famine... Super viruses...

And what does this fundie do with all his money and resources?

He builds a giant boat, that cannot float, and puts unicorns and dinosaurs in it.

O_o

[Screamapillar]

I'm excited to report that I now get to drive past a billboard for the Creation Museum on my drive home every evening! It just went up right on the interstate heading out of downtown Nashville. I laughed and laughed when I saw it.

It's a giant picture of a dinosaur with the caption "276 Miles Away." And then it says Creation Museum, much smaller, at the bottom. Trying to lure innocent passerby in with the promise of dinosaurs! Now I'll be on the lookout for Ark Encounter billboards.

[Petrel]

20 hours ago, CyborgKin said:

I'm not saying Christians can't be devout while not taking Genesis as history.  But why give Jesus' words any weight when he said:

Or why trust anything Peter wrote as he also wrote:

Why trust Luke, who wrote that Jesus was decended from Noah and Adam?

If I have to choose between A) believing the universe was created 6000 years ago and almost everything destroyed in one event 4000 years ago and Jesus, Peter, and Luke were mistaken or mythological or B) the universe, the solar system, and life itself are billions of years old as the evidence suggests, I'll go with the evidence.  

I had to help out with vacation Bible school today and they talked about Noah and the Flood.  It put my teeth on edge.  We watched a cartoon where the other people were laughing at Noah and I was like, "They'll be sorry they laughed WHEN THEY'RE DEAD."  Not good stuff to teach little children.  

[FormerlyFundyLite]

On ‎7‎/‎11‎/‎2016 at 10:40 PM, EscapedCardinal said:

Well, hell, then I wish they'd done dragons, mermaids, and jackalopes too. And a big kraken hanging off the side eating the dodos.

I haven't been yet (Mom is threatening to turn it into a family vacation next year), but the Creation Museum web site indicates that there's an entire exhibit on dragons (and the gift shop is called Dragon Hall Bookstore).

[Peas n carrots]

I'm excited to report that I now get to drive past a billboard for the Creation Museum on my drive home every evening! It just went up right on the interstate heading out of downtown Nashville. I laughed and laughed when I saw it.

It's a giant picture of a dinosaur with the caption "276 Miles Away." And then it says Creation Museum, much smaller, at the bottom. Trying to lure innocent passerby in with the promise of dinosaurs! Now I'll be on the lookout for Ark Encounter billboards.

There is one in Chicago too on the Stevenson Expressway - I buzz past on my way to the airport.

One of my gf's and I are planning a trip to there in October. I hate giving them my money but I can't help myself it sounds like a good laugh.

[Coco]

On 7/6/2016 at 9:20 PM, Janes Heir said:

I think this is perhaps a conclusion that makes sense to to many of us at first, but I have to respectfully challenge some of the assumptions here. First of all, at least a portion of Christians who believe in evolution recognize that while God is by His/Her/Their nature infallible and all-knowing*, the text of scripture as a medium of communication is by its nature always undergoing interpretation and many factors can and should contribute to a meaningful reading of the text. Science is just one of these and an understanding of the genre of Genesis 1-11 and comparison with other Ancient Near Eastern (ANE) writings makes clear to some that to interpret these passages as a "scientific" (the word itself is anachronistic to an ANE understanding) account of origins does violence to the text. Denis Lamoureaux of the University of Alberta started a graduate degree in theology with plans to then get a PhD in an evolutionary field to "dismantle" evolution from the inside. However, during his time getting a theology degree he started to doubt that "scientific concordism" is part of the Genesis accounts. He's now a strong proponent for people recognizing that "the book of God's words" and the "book of God's works" may not speak the same language, but both should be respected and believed on the claims they actually make for themselves. Lamoureaux is just an example and there are certainly others whose understanding of scripture allows them to recognize multiple epistemological lenses for viewing different kinds of knowledge.

Your final question is a very challenging one and I don't have an ultimate answer. (I would, of course, take issue with the simplistic notion that God "wrote that He didn't" since some intelligent Christians understand inspiration as more of a process of engagement through writers, redactors, translators, commentators, communities, personal experiences, and on and on.) However, I keep a book on my bedside table by the Catholic theologian Elizabeth A. Johnson called Ask the Beasts: Darwin and the God of Love. The issues this book raises sometimes pain me, but its intelligent look at evolutionary creation fills me with such awe of the natural world (and as a doubting believer, also for its Creator) that the pain of theses questions is worth while. I know many posters here are not Christians or believers and I'm not writing this to try to convince anyone that believing in both the Bible and evolution is the most perfectly sensible conclusion or that the Bible is inspired.  I only want to explain that I think there can be intellectual honesty in wrestling with questions of authority, genre and epistemology, and in holding the "both/and" rather than digging into a trench of "either God's words or man's". 

*There are some Christians who do not believe God fully knows the future

 

*whatever scientific proof emerges, believers can and will do the mental gymnastics to make faith accomodate reality. 

fixed it for you 

On 7/8/2016 at 4:23 PM, HereticHick said:

Are there really enough fundies who can afford the crazy high ticket prices ($40 for adults; $28 for kids, & parking is extra. Kids under 5 are free. But there seems to be no bulk discount for kids over 5) to visit this more than once?

Sure, the Duggars & Batessesseses will load up the bus & visit, but probably they'll get comp tix in exchange for publicity.

But an awful lot of large fundy families don't have hundreds of dollars to shell out for this. Even a simple family of 4, with 1 kid under 5, will be $108--plus parking!!!   Quiverfull Christians are hardly at the top of the socioeconomic ladder in the U.S.

I don't really see this as a commercially viable enterprise longterm.  Of course when it starts to fail Ken Ham will go begging for tax relief  [it isn't welfare if white Christian fundies get it, right? : )]

 

It's also shitty quality lmao and dirty  

The Science Enthusiast went and did a great blog post on it, more coming later. http://ascienceenthusiast.com/ark-encounter-part-1/

[Cleopatra7]

Jessa has already visited the Ark Encounter and she's gotten flack for it:

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/jessa.seewald.gets.criticised.for.visiting.ark.encounter/90355.htm

[princessmahina]

I pass through/by Louisville on my way to visit my grandmother. I've been begging people I go with (sometimes one parent, sometimes both, sometimes others) to go and snark with me, but no one will. 

And I'm not making that trek by myself. My boyfriend said he'll go if he can wear a shirt that has Darwin painted in the style of the Obama "Hope" posters with "Very Gradual Change We Can Believe In" written on it. 

Any southern Jingers want to have a snark-cation in Louisville? I'll bake lots of cookies for the drive up. 

[EmiGirl]

1 hour ago, princessmahina said:

I pass through/by Louisville on my way to visit my grandmother. I've been begging people I go with (sometimes one parent, sometimes both, sometimes others) to go and snark with me, but no one will. 

And I'm not making that trek by myself. My boyfriend said he'll go if he can wear a shirt that has Darwin painted in the style of the Obama "Hope" posters with "Very Gradual Change We Can Believe In" written on it. 

Any southern Jingers want to have a snark-cation in Louisville? I'll bake lots of cookies for the drive up. 

I would totally go if I had someone who would snark with me in the car. Unfortunately my husband is still a fan of Ken Ham so going with him could quite possibly end in divorce.

[ADoyle90815]

Part of me wants to go, but I'd be kicked out for not being able to hold back on the snark and for laughing to the point of incontinence.

[Petrel]

1 hour ago, princessmahina said:

My boyfriend said he'll go if he can wear a shirt that has Darwin painted in the style of the Obama "Hope" posters with "Very Gradual Change We Can Believe In" written on it. 

He would probably be turned away at the door.  I've heard people wearing clothes with pro-evolution messages were blocked from the creation museum. 

[princessmahina]

1 hour ago, Petrel said:

He would probably be turned away at the door.  I've heard people wearing clothes with pro-evolution messages were blocked from the creation museum. 

That's what I told him, but he insists that if he hid it under a jacket, he'd be able to get through.

I think we'd get kicked out before I got to zipline, and that would be a travesty. 

1 hour ago, EmiGirl said:

I would totally go if I had someone who would snark with me in the car. Unfortunately my husband is still a fan of Ken Ham so going with him could quite possibly end in divorce.

Ohh, that's a shame. 

[backyard sylph]

It's less than an hour from here. But—forty dollars plus four gallons of gas round trip for something so silly doesn't seem right just for a laugh. I'd rather either continue on down the road to the Falls of the Ohio which I saw several years ago (plus it's kind of the anti-Creation Museum,) and would like to see again because they just remodeled it this past winter, or just take a bourbon distillery tour. I've taken two at Buffalo Trace and one at Woodford Reserve, but one that was also being remodeled while I was there, so I'd like to see it finished.

A lot of Kentucky is pretty groovy, you guys. I enjoy driving down there, and I recommend it. But not to give this joker any of your hard-earned cash.

[Cleopatra7]

Based on the review given upthread by the Science Enthusiast, it seems like the Ark Encounter is basically little more than a very expensive roadside attraction. While the Ark itself seems to be pretty large, it appears to be mostly empty on the inside and the little that it does have consists of badly done taxidermy interspersed with placards that say goddidit. In other words, it simply reaffirms the YEC view, which most of the visitors already believe is true. I suppose hard-core creationist culture warriors like the Duggars will like it (and we all know they have no appreciation for real museums or real culture) but I can't see how this can stay solvent in the long-term.

[EmiGirl]

2 hours ago, princessmahina said:

 

Ohh, that's a shame. 

Yes. That part of our life is definitely not easy.