The Creation Museum Is About Sin, Not Creationism

Some members of Red River Freethinkers have visited the Creation Museum, I have not. A review by a writer of a religious publication visited recently and gave it a negative review. Among observations about its faulty theology, he noted the frequent references to the “fallen world” and how a return to the literal Bible view is imperative.

There are Christians who see evolution as something science based and compatible with creationism. Literalists find this unacceptable. It is not possible to give one inch to evolution. The Creation Museum is in that camp. And, having a discussion as to how creationism and science can co exist takes focus off of sin, the most important issue.

Staying with your group is common for all of us. Liberals like to hang out with liberals.

It is different, however, when we get the Bible involved. Here we see mythology pitted against fact-based science. That the universe of all creatures on earth were created by some invisible God is so far fetched it rules out the possibility for rational dialogue. And the accompanying view that early is only 6,000 years old contradicts conclusions of science. That these are true is less important than informing us we must believe to save the world from sin.

Tourist attractions slaying sin seem a growing part of evangelism today. We have the Creation Museum, Noah’s Ark theme park and soon the largest cross the U.S. The latter is being promoted as a big tourist attraction with anticipated business success in the region.

15 Responses

  1. Jinx II

    Its nothing but fantasy and too many Americans think that’s just fine, just look at who they voted into office.

  2. Randall Wehler

    Jon,

    You need to google “Clergy Letter Project” to get a glimpse of what religions and Christian denominations and individual churches have signed off as supporting evolution and its compatibility with Christianity. I learned of this through progressivechristianity.org several years ago.

    1. godless

      If you want to believe the Creation Museum is a financial success, by all means go ahead. Mr Hamm has blamed atheists for his financial troubless.

      1. Henry

        By your narrative and Jon’s predictions, as what happens in financial difficulty, doors should be locked and windows shuttered. Not so.

        1. Henry 8:52 By you narrative and Jon’s predictions…doors should be locked and windows shuttered. Not so.
          The ark remains open at lower than promised revenues. Local subsidies have not been recouped and local economic development has not happened. I, myself, would call it a failure, not for Ham, but for local tax payers.

          1. Henry 10:21 Clearly not treated any differently than any secular group.

            Not exactly. It got millions in subsidies. That was to be recouped by property tax increases, both taxes paid by the Ark and by development, i.e. new businesses, around the ark. First the traffic was not as high as projected and not much new development happened. Property taxes on surrounding property did not increase as projected. Second, the Ark owners decided they did not want to pay any property taxes themselves. That is ANY property taxes, let alone increases in tax revenue they promised to get the subsidy. So, the owners (Ken Ham) sold the private business for $10 to a newly formed non profit. Now they pay no property taxes.

            As some locals pointed out, it looks like stiffing local citizens and their government was the plan all along. It is similar, if not identical to, stealing. So, was it like any secular economic development? It is not that uncommon that subsidized businesses fail and some of the anticipated revenue is lost. I don’t know of another case where a private business became a church with the purpose of stiffing local people. This from a group claiming its religion is the source of moral values for the larger community.

            Gosh, without Christianity we might see dishonesty.

          2. Henry

            I have never seen an “economic development” pitch go the way it was promised. I have seen a ND factory publicly seek tax credits. Part of the pitch was they were going to add 150 “workers” to their “workforce”. After they renovated and “expanded”, I saw less pickup trucks parked in the worker parking lot than before. By this measure, and the general results of “economic development”, the Ark Encounter is really no different. By some measures, it is better.

            I also know of a ND city committed to “economic development”. In the typical astuteness of “economic development”, the City taxpayers bought out a functioning motel and restaurant for a high price, moved the structures off the property, and got the property ready for some doctors who wanted to split off from the small town hospital to start their own clinic. Never happened, and there was no binding signed contracts to protect the city. The newly created empty lot in town sat empty for several years and then eventually became a parking lot for semi trailers in the midst of town. “Economic development” at your service.

          3. Henry 1:32 I’m not disagreeing–I made the same statement in my post, these deals often do not come down as promised.

            I can only repeat that the Ark deal ended up with the religion that teaches “morals” to the general society using the Christian religion to complete a business maneuver that it profited from. It appears that if the Ark had not done this it would now be closed. If it were now closed, local governments would be at the table dividing up whatever was left over to pay part of what is owed them. The Ark’s sale for $10 to become a church left local governments with nothing.

            Please don’t confuse the issue by bring up other failed deals. I’ve already agreed they happens.

          4. Henry

            JL:“I can only repeat that the Ark deal ended up with the religion that teaches “morals” to the general society using the Christian religion to complete a business maneuver that it profited from.”
            Profited from? Or failed? Please pick one.

            JL:“The Ark’s sale for $10 to become a church left local governments with nothing.”
            And what did the courts say?

            JL:“Please don’t confuse the issue by bring up other failed deals.”
            Looks like failed? Failed the taxpayer by taking farmland off the tax rolls, $200 per year loss. Maybe the ffrf can hold a fundraiser.

  3. I cannot speak to the motivation or thinking behind the Ark Project and the twists and turns it has legally taken. In all of Jon’s posts he has not brought up any illegal activities, i.e. activities that might have transpired with the Clinton Foundation during SoS Hillary’s tenure at State.

    Meanwhile, a Minnesota man has been charged with attempted murder of a North Dakota Catholic priest – http://www.inforum.com/news/crime-and-courts/4399611-minn-man-charged-attempted-murder-after-priest-attack-rural-nd-church

    Since this blog is supposed to be about local issues and there is no “Ark” in ND or MN, an attempted murder seems much more important.

  4. Catcher

    Would it be possible for the RCC to grant indulgences to go on pilgrimages to these places if they got a piece of the action on tickets?

Comments are closed.