a) I must admit to having a couple friends involved in that project. While their theology and mine may differ, all power to them
b) I am more impressed with the Dutch efforts. First, cheaper and at least to me more impressive
Thanks. I didn’t think you really did.
The biggest issue I have with Bible literalists is that, for anyone familiar with Biblical history, there are stories that were chucked out long ago that were originally a part of the Hebrew Bible that we are just now rediscovering. Why is the “new” set of stories any better than the old? Ask the scholars of the time.
Finally got around to reading the entire thread. You would be surprised how many are out there, both floating and stationary. Some are small scale and some are serious efforts at full-sized recreations. Some are meant to continue the Biblical version and some are flat-out amusement park rides (IE Noah’s Ark in Kennywood Park) that may reflect the Biblical tradition or not. And this isn’t just a American bible-belt thing; they pop up all over the world. But the folks in Kentucky are far from unique - just for some reason a little more controversial and confrontational than most.
I have addressed this is other threads. There are NO contradictions in the Bible. Now, yes, there are APPARENT contradictions. But that is a sign that further study is needed. Once both passages are fully understood, the apparent contradiction disappears.
If somebody claimed to be a car, would you believe them?
Suppose they said, “I go to a mechanic on a regular basis, and I drink oil and gas.” Would that make them a car? Of course not.
In exactly the same way, just because somebody claims to be a Christian, and does some of the things that Christians do, does not automatically make them a Christian.
Again, no. Archbishop Usher (1581–1656) took the Bible literally. Otherwise, there would have been no point in trying to figure out when the various events took place. John Bunyan (1628–1688), author of the immortal Pilgrim’s Progress, believed the literalness of the Bible. And I have read excerpts from Irenaeus’ book Against Heresies (written about 180 A.D.) It’s very obvious that he both took the Bible literally and also believed that there was only one truth and one way to Heaven. Literalism was the default until a couple hundred years ago.
Parable-speak makes Jesus harder to understand, not easier.
“And the disciples came, and said unto Him, Why do you speak unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto YOU to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but unto them it is NOT given.” Matt 13:10-11
Throughout the Gospels, we are frequently told that the disciplines were perplexed by Jesus’s lessons. Jesus knows they are confused and kind of gives them a hard time about it:
“And He (Jesus) said unto them (His disciples), How is it that ye do NOT understand?” Mark 8:21
Which causes the poor guys to feign understanding.
“But they understood NOT that saying, and were afraid to ask him.” Mark 9:32
Finally, Jesus lets the guys off the hook and promises everything will become clearer later:
“These things have I spoken unto you in PROVERBS: but the time comes when I shall no more speak unto you in proverbs, but I shall show you PLAINLY of the Father.” John 16:25
If the parables were easy to understand, there would be no need for bible study or websites attempting to break things down for the masses. We are no dumber than the folks who lived back in biblical times. Metaphor and allegory are inherently hard to grok for the average mind. Jesus had the ability to preach in plain terms. I’m sure there are a number of hypotheses out there for why he didn’t more often.
My guess? People really like for their religion to be shrouded in mystery. People like being able to “prove” their membership to an elite group, and having enough dedication to learn how to interpret a parable provides that evidence. But if anyone off the street can hear the message and understand it just fine without having to strain their brain, then what kind of easy religion is that? People in general don’t want a religion with mass appeal. They want one that appeals to only a special few.
How…convenient.
The guy I heard years ago said that the “firmament” was basically a solid shield around the planet (ISTR that Josephus said that as well). While it was intact, Earth’s atmospheric pressure was considerably greater. Once it was gone the atmospheric pressure dropped, rendering the massive dinosaurs unable to breathe properly, so they died out.
Catholics aren’t true Christians.
My only comment is that I can’t believe the state the attraction is being built in isn’t ARKansas.
No, New Jersey . . . in NewArk.
Actually, back in the '80s, Kea Tawana* started to build an 86-foot ark in Newark. It was unjustifiably condemned, and she was ordered to demolish it.
*not to be confused with Kiri Te Kanawa
So if I write a book and say that everything in it is liiterally true straight from the mouth of God then it must be? There mst have been a lot of infallible folks involved. I think the term used in the NT and OT classes I took (at an evagelical liberal arts college) was “proof texting”. To me if someone’s faith rises or falls on the book being inerrant the faith isn’t very strong. Same goes for atheists insisting on an all or nothing approach.
As far as the Ark goes, I’m not sure it’ll work as a stand alone attraction. Maybe put a brew pub in the lower level.
I think Newark, DE would be a better place.
Jefferson’s Bible deserves a mention, here.
But you’re not the one who gets to decide who’s a Christian. The vast majority of people who call themselves Christians do not believe as you do. Within Christianity as a whole, you represent a small minority.
If you decided that only steam-powered vehicles could be called cars, that would not make the vehicles that everyone else called cars to cease being cars.
Gosh, no, that’d be silly. You have to dig up the ancient gold plates with the book inscribed on them, as guided by an angel, and then translate it by dowsing or something.
One source said that the Ark includes a 1,500-seat restaurant and banquet hall.
Will every animal on the ark be on the menu?
Probably not the model animals, because they’re using animatronics.