Remember your Creator in the days of your youth! |
There are many good reasons to visit the Ark Encounter at Williamstown, KY. People have wanted to know what we think. I wrote earlier about some of the positives, and a few of the things of "caution". Here are the last two issues of concern to me: Consider AiG's depiction of the ark itself. This design is of their own making, and seems to many people we've talked to as a "repackaging" of the vessel -- like trying to reinvent the wheel. This is a form of branding, basically to set yourself apart from others.
Furthermore, the secular world often depicts the ark as a ship ~ as does AiG. It wasn't a ship. It was a box. That's what the Hebrew word means. A ship is designed with a prow, an energy source, and guiding mechanisms so that it can travel through the water
efficiently from Point A to Point B. The ark had no energy source, and therefore no need for a prow. It wasn't going anywhere, either, so their was no need for any "directional" devices. It was merely an emergency floatation device.
At this point, some will protest, thinking that there's nothing wrong with using a little imagination so long as it doesn't conflict with the scriptures. This is true, but many of the exhibits depict this version within the
context of other exhibits and points that are scripturally true and accurate. This becomes a form of subtle indoctrination. All of the arks depicted on any merchandise sold in the store are this version only. That stands to reason, of course, because it's their "brand" of the vessel. The risk is that people -- especially children -- can
potentially think that this is "gospel truth".
Of greater concern is their explanation of the mechanism that produced the flood. The basis of this concept is a secular idea of the history of the earth related to geology called plate tectonics. In its raw form, it proposes billions of years of Earth's
history. The proposed mechanism used in the Ark Encounter is a version of this theory that is "sped up" to fit into the year of the flood. I and many others disagree with this concept for many reasons, biblical and scientific, but that is a topic for a future e-mail. Again, it's well worth a visit because of the many good qualities, but it's good to be
aware of issues like this. |
|
|
|