5 Reasons Why The Ark Encounter Is A Bad Idea

The Ark Encounter.

The Ark Encounter opened in 2016 and is Bible based theme park located in Kentucky, America. It is a product of the Answers in Genesis founder Ken Ham. Ham is a young-Earth, Bible-science creationist who is also the founder of the Creation Museum (the sister of the Ark Encounter).

The Ark Encounter is an enormous wooden ship (built according to the dimensions of the ark recorded in the biblical Genesis account) that is intended to be both a museum as well as a monument. Some Christians are on the same boat with Ham given that many  believe it to be the latest and greatest biblical attraction.

What floats Ham’s boat (forgive me for these whimsical puns) is that his, and his colleagues, preferred exegetical method is to take some of the Bible narratives absolutely literally, as if they read as strictly scientific and historical accounts. What this has led them to is the belief that the universe was created by God in six 24-hour periods and that the Earth is just some 6000 to 10 000 years old. Ham and his followers attempt to dispute any evidence for the scientific theory of evolution and an old Earth/universe.

Ham claims that the Ark Encounter is a “family-oriented, historically authentic, and environmentally friendly” attraction, and if he is successful it will “equip visitors to understand the reality of the events that are recorded in the book of Genesis” (1). A stroll through the ark will show visitors that Ham believes there was a real global flood, that Noah and his family really did build a ship of the same size and dimensions as written in Genesis 6, that all of the animals brought by God to Noah did fit inside the ark, including the dinosaurs, and that God saved Noah and his family and the animals on the ark.

Can one credit the ark with doing something good?

I suppose one can give some credit although its mostly on aesthetic features. As a physical structure itself the monument seems impressive, inside and out. It is detailed, and it attempts to bring an ancient biblical story out from the Bible and into the real world. The ship is full of artifacts such as life-size dinosaurs and creative (and I do mean creative) biblical scenes. Since the Genesis account says very little about what happened on the ark it required Ham to take a great deal of artistic license. Add into the picture a petting zoo, shops, and restaurants, and the ark is for many visitors something quite fun and entertaining. However, in my personal view this is drowned out by all the negatives.

Apparently Noah, or someone, was making shields, or barrels, on the ark?

1. The Monumental Waste of Money

Ham believes that the Ark Encounter will get people to consider the value of scripture. He claims that

“some of the aggressive secularists try to shut down people talking about the Bible… So for us it’s ‘How can we get a message out there about the Bible?'”

In other words, to avoid a sinking ship he thought that constructing a massive 100 million dollar structure would patch up the hull. But that’s a lot of money. Andy Walton, writing for Christian Today, says that,

“Getting out the message about the Bible is a laudable aim. But Jesus managed it without so much as a roof over his head. Paul managed it while he was being beaten with rods, stones, shipwrecked and much more besides… St Francis did it in poverty. Martin Luther did it with a piece of paper. Jonathan Edwards did it with barnstorming sermons. Corrie Ten Boom did it until she was thrown into a prison camp by the Nazis. Pope Francis does it with humility… None of them seemed to need a 100 million dollar boat to get people talking about the Bible” (2).

This is true. Rather than splurging denarii on monuments and overseeing building construction, the Apostle Paul got himself shipwrecked in the process of reaching unbelievers with the Gospel. One wonders if the 100 million dollars could have been better used uplifting the poor and sick while sharing the Gospel. How many missionaries and evangelists could have been sponsored by such finances in their efforts of not only helping and assisting the sicking, looking after orphans and the the poor, but also getting “a message out there about the Bible,” to use Ham’s own words? I find that it is incredibly sad that 100 million dollars of money, which could have been better used than on a theme park, has been wasted in cement and wood. Tyler Francke is quite scathing, “As a Christian, this kind of absurd, profligate waste (by an organization that purports to serve Christ, no less) absolutely disgusts me” (3).

The Ark Encounter is also divisive in a way that sending missionaries to help the poor and sick is not. The Ark Encounter is predicated on a very problematic and controversial interpretation of the Bible which not only further alienates unbelievers (who take much joy in mocking young-Earth creationist beliefs) but too causes Christians embarrassment. As such, I believe the Ark Encounter is not really about “getting the Bible out there” as opposed to “getting Ken Ham’s view of the Bible out there.”

Surely for Christ a single human being is of much more worth than a wooden ship (of any size), and surely Christ would find far more pleasure in feeding a single empty stomach than splurging dollars on 50 wooden ships. Francke bitingly concludes,

“I’m sure that the children starving to death in Sudan and Chad and Ecuador and many, many other places, will find great comfort in the fact that a ludicrously expensive wooden ship (that can’t even float) is materializing somewhere on the other side of the world.”

I believe that the Ark Encounter will prove counterproductive for Ham. For every Christian who is amazed by its presence there will likely be seekers being further distanced from the Gospel, and many Christians becoming confused in equating ludicrous young-Earth creationist beliefs with modern science, history, and just about every field which conflicts with young-Earth ideology.

Enter a caption

2. The Science

Bill Nye, a naturalist and claimed public science representative (without qualifications to show for it, and I simply quote him here since he represents what most academic experts would say about the ark) with whom I don’t share many beliefs, toured the Ark Encounter which attracted some media and public attention. Nye said that “on the third deck (of the ark), every single science exhibit is absolutely wrong. Not just misleading, but wrong” (4). He also said that the Ark Encounter is “much more troubling or disturbing than I thought it would be.”

It is hard to explain just how bad young-Earth science is. A 6000 year old Earth, a global flood, dinosaurs living alongside human beings, Adam and Eve being the first human beings and progenitors of the human race, and so on, are just some of the beliefs held by this camp. To most people (and just about every scientist and historian) these beliefs are absurd, which explains why young-Earth creation science has increasingly bled numbers and why it has been relegated to fringe groups like Creation International or Answers In Genesis. Adherents to these beliefs and views within the public space are at an all time low. It is at its lowest point in the USA, and is nearly non-existent in other countries like Canada and England. People are realizing that they cannot hold to these beliefs in face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. However, there also appears to be a moral element in play here which Nye noticed himself when he said that,

“You have hundreds of school kids there who have already been indoctrinated and who have been brainwashed… [It] is the absolutely wrong idea that the Earth is 6,000 years old…”

Walton agrees saying that “The worst part is the vast, vast majority of scientists disagree with what’s being presented at the park – this makes the project look naïve at best; wasteful, deceitful and dishonest at worst.”

Ham (right) sharing the gospel message and trying to convert Nye in the Ark Encounter.

3. The Credibility of the Gospel

Ham, I believe, ends up posing a severe challenge to spiritual seekers as well as Christians. How so? Simply in that either one chooses to believe what Ham does about the Bible (the Ark Encounter is more about Ham and his young-Earth beliefs than it is ever about sharing the Gospel) or modern science.

Quite naturally, many are going to go with science. This is not because science and the views of the scientists are anti-Christian (which many within Ham’s camp contend) but because science is what has all the evidence in its favour over creationist beliefs. Many people will also see through what is clearly an awful interpretation of the Genesis account even if it is historical. Further, many of those who are already Christian will end up leaving the church. These believers are often brought up within insulated home and church environments, and when they go into the world they lose their faith. Why? Because they have been taught to think that one must either choose the Bible (Ham’s Bible) or science. No wonder why there is an exodus of young people from the church. I would not entirely put the blame on Ham as several factors explain this trend, but Ham and his Ark Encounter are one major reason for it. Mark Woods explains,

“I have to regard as his theological error has led to such a massive waste of Kingdom resources that it can’t be described as anything other than tragic. It’s not just the money, though $100 million could do untold good if it were applied to evangelism or poverty relief or development. It’s the intellectual investment so many good people have put into defending the indefensible. It’s the damage to the credibility of the gospel among people who know the world is nearly 14 billion years old, not 6,000, and won’t take Jesus seriously if they think they have to believe otherwise” (8).

4. A Monument in Celebration of Genocide

The Ark Encounter, when reduced to its core, is based on a mythological account of mass genocide brought on by an angry deity. Yes, it does qualify as genocide, and constitutes only one of several genocides God is thought to have committed in the Old Testament. But it almost certainly did not happen. Christian biblical scholar Peter Enns says that “the flood story, though rooted in history, is dressed up in mythic clothes from head to toe” (5). Given the advances of science as well as biblical and historical scholarship it is almost impossible to challenge this view. The Genesis creation story (and the Flood which occurs later in the narrative) belongs to myth with a clear theological motif for the author to show that Yahweh is superior to the gods of the other nations, particularly that of the Babylonians (after all, Genesis was penned while the Israelites were being held in exile by Babylon). The story serves to show that Yahweh is in full control of nature, his creation, that he can obliterate everything should he so wish, as well as restore order. It is also a story that deliberately contrasts itself with other mythologies. Whereas, for example, the Babylonian god Marduk enslaves humanity, the Genesis author goes to some length to show that God loves human being, and even creates them in his image.

The inspired theology behind this myth is rich, but the flood and Adam and Eve are almost certainly not based on historical events. It is also certainly not a historical or scientific account of human and Earthly origins. The late Christian scholar James Barr explains that scholars realize,

“Such material [is not considered] to be historical or scientific: it belongs to legend… It belongs to mythology, or to the psychology of ancient peoples, or to literary symbolism, but it certainly is not historical or scientific chronology” (6).

To ask the question of its historicity concerning the flood misses the point of its message. But despite this many Christians do still believe in a global flood, which Alexis Misra sees presents its own set of problems,

“If evangelicals believe this is a true story and that millions perished in the cruelest way, why is there rejoicing and not sorrow? Why is it treated as a tourist attraction rather than a memorial?” (7).

“The staggering death toll that occurred according to the Bible’s [flood] was enough to make me a certified skeptic… so surely, hardcore inerrant-Bible-believing evangelicals would be doubly sickened by it, no? No. They’re not – quite the opposite, in fact. They have built a “world-class” (their words, not mine) attraction out of it… In the Bible, God obliterated humanity, and that should be a heart-wrenching realization for evangelicals. It was a far greater horror than that committed by even Adolf Hitler, and building a monument commemorating this atrocity is like modern-day Germany proudly displaying a gas chamber.”

How many hungry men, women, and children could have been fed with the money it costed to create this dinosaur?

5. It’s a False Picture of Christianity

Ham and his followers believe that their way of seeing the Bible, Christianity, the flood and science is the only true way. So much so that they’re willing to spend 100 million dollars on a monument. Their narrative presented here (and elsewhere) is essentially that to be a faithful Christian one has to believe as they do. Anything else brings into dispute the authority and inspiration of the Bible, and also Christianity’s truth. However, a black and white perspective such as this does not speak to reality at all. Walton observes that,

“Many Americans don’t fall easily into either camp. Many Christians won’t. They may have diverse opinions on sexual ethics, on life issues, on evolution, on hell, on what role government should play in society, on healthcare, and indeed on science.”

However, this is of course omitted by Ham. Why? Because the Ark Encounter is about Ham and his views of the Bible, and not ultimately about Christ or God, or those within God’s kingdom who hold to different views on peripheral topics (the Flood is one such topic). According to Ham if you doubt his way of seeing Genesis then you are doubting the Bible, and if you doubt the Bible you’re doubting God. Essentially it all starts with Ham, and God gets tacked on at the end.

However, Christianity has had rich history (and presence) of interpretive measures when it comes to certain biblical texts, including Genesis (as well as those which pose moral dilemmas such as God’s commanding of genocide in the Old Testament etc.). As such, it is no surprise that there are Christians who believe the universe (and the Earth) are old, that evolutionary theory is compatible with belief, that God did not really flood the Earth, and so on. What I believe is that these views and interpretations should be debated respectfully. Let no-one be like Ham and his followers who tell Christians (who believe differently to them) how unChristian and unfaithful they are. In saying this I am not at all supporting interpretations that are clearly opposed to Christianity in its fundamentals. What I am saying is that Christians do not need to accept Ham’s narrow criterion for judging what constitutes a faithful Christian.


1. Woods, M. 2016. Ken Ham’s Noah’s Ark: Evangelistic supertool or colossal waste of money? Available.

2. Walton, A. 2016 A waste of 100 million dollars: Why the Noah’s Ark replica in Kentucky should never have happened. Available.

3. Francke, T. 2014. What Ken Ham’s ‘Ark Encounter’ money could buy instead. Available.

4. Arel, D. 2016. Bill Nye on the Ark Encounter: ‘every single science exhibit is absolutely wrong.’ Available.

5. Enns, P. 2014. The Bible Tells Me So. p. 152 (Scribd ebook format).

6. Barr, J. 1987. Biblical Chronology, Fact or Fiction? Available.

7. Misra, A. 2016. A Close Encounter of the Ark Kind. Available.

8. Woods, M. 2016. Ibid.


  1. This appreciation is really really disapoinment, True based on Bible -Christian will not give the major credit to scientific world, even when it is so so uncertainly and always go wrong about its theories, science is a good tool when is used to try understand our world but not to make doctrine or trying to frame the allmighty God in our poor and little comprehension, How could you say that flood was just a mesopotamian myth when Jesus himself pointed the flood as a real event and compares with his real second coming? How can you seed these kind of ideas on Christian people?, just why we don`t know the flood mechanisms or a scientific religion claims based on its prejudiced-remarks that it never be existed it doesn´t they have the truth, if you want to look like a “modern” and “progressive” Christian you can be so, but Bible is not a Myths and legend Book, you can put your faith where you want to put, but remember Bible is the living word of God, and it says many things that we can not to reconcile in our minds as Everlasting Life, Resurrection, Universal Kingdom, Angels, Demons, Miracles, and all kind of things that we cannot prove through our scientific methods, the human knowledge is very limited, but we are proud and we aim to understand everything, I remember the words of Jesus when said:

    Mat 18:3 And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.
    Mat 18:4 Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

    God may help you to get the truly Christian faith back again, only based on The Living Word of God. No matter what people says.

  2. James, I like your blog and always like most of what you say but this article is weak and decrepit to say the least. $100 000 000 over and over and children in Sudan : you sound like an atheist philanthropist ad that is what they would say.

    Ham is spectacular and his rendition of the ark is fantastic and the fact that he goes against evolutionary teaching is stunning in its own right. YEC will never push away any potential Christian : it’s a topic everyone can deal with. Ham needs to be celebrated and money is artificial and we’ll spent on such an amazing monument. Well done Ken Ham, I salute him.

  3. Young-earth/old earth is fortunately not an issue believers need to divide over.
    However, it is certainly not true that “…no scientist in any field, anywhere in the world, agrees with what is being presented by Ham and his Ark Encounter museum. No professional expert in geology, stratigraphy, geophysics, physics, paleontology, biology, anthropology, and archaeology believes that the Earth is just 6000 years old, that dinosaurs lived alongside man, and that there was a global flood. Nearly no scientist agrees with the anti-evolution polemic being presented in the museum.” There are indeed scientists who can competently argue for a young earth.

  4. And by the way, naturalism is indeed not a religion like Christianity, but a blind belief as it excludes a priori the possibility of existence of God and in spite of all the evidence

  5. This was a good post. Many cultures have some description of a Great Flood, and that alone should give us pause as to its actual occurrence. One could also argue that if multiple NON-Biblical cultures recorded a flood, then the entire human race – except Noah and his family – was not wiped out by it.

  6. So basically, “I’m against the plain literal interpretation of the Bible so I’m against the Ark”?

    For the cost, this was done by private donations, not just Ken Ham. Yeah, sure, poor kids and whatnot. You know what else Jesus said? The poor ye will have always. You don’t have the right to judge what we do with our own money that is clearly not a sin. And building an ark, however frivolous you think it is, is not a sin.

  7. The article’s “Five Points Against the Ark Encounter” are these:

    1. The Monumental Waste of Money.
    2. The Really, Really Bad Science.
    3. The Credibility of the Gospel.
    4. A Monument to Celebrating Genocide.
    5. It’s a False Picture of Christianity.
    And a bonus! 6. Ham and his Ark Encounter’s Double Standard.

    We’ve heard it before about the Ark Encounter, all I can say is, “What about all of the other expensive enterprises that are undergone in the world or even this country?” The author brings up quotes by other people that basically say, “As a Christian, I’m disgusted at this flagrant waste of money.” And then he brings Jesus into it by asking what He would think. There is actually quite a bit of emotional rhetoric, especially by the time people get to number 4.

    Here are my brief responses:

    1.Where does the Bible say that Christians cannot be entrepreneurs? There is the passage where Jesus tells the young ruler to sell everything he has and follow Him. (Matthew 19:21; Mark 10:21; Luke 18:22) That, however, is not a call for all people who follow Jesus to sell all of their possessions and to become a hermit. For the rich young ruler, his possessions were a stumbling block, and Jesus knew that. Jesus deals with each of us according to our needs. As Paul says, the love of money is the root of all kinds of evil. (1 Timothy 6:10)

    Did the author stop to think that this Ark could be a source of income for missions work and jobs? He brings up the starving child in Sudan (much like atheists who bring up those poor natives who have not heard the gospel) and my response is, “What are you doing?” Yes, it is good to feed the poor. It is better to feed them spiritually. We should do both. A meal will buy them another day in this world. Introducing them to Christ will give them eternal life. Setting people free spiritually liberates them from the trials of this world.

    2.How is it bad science? Because it disagrees with modern secular scientists? (Shocker.) Putting aside, for a moment, the debate between Christians about the age of the earth, there are many scientists that say the world was created. Hugh Ross is a well known Old Earth Creationist and Scientist. Then there are the people at ICR, who are YEC scientists. Just because the science talked about regarding the Ark is not the mainstream, naturalistic, uniformitarian brand, does not make it false.

    3.The strong YEC view is blamed for the credibility of the gospel being in decline, especially with young people. Yes, the truth is rather unpopular with them, especially when people are failing to teach them how to defend their faith, and when they do, it is usually with nothing more than a coloring book. Aside from the story of Noah itself, he is mentioned in the Bible multiple times: 1 Chronicles 1:4; Isaiah 54:9; Ezekiel 14:14, 20; Matthew 24:37-8; Luke 3:36, 17:26-7; Hebrews 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5.

    Noah is regarded by multiple people, including our Lord and Savior Jesus Himself, as a real person, and the global flood as a real event. There is no getting around that for people who claim to be Christians and believe the Bible.

    4.I’m not sure what to say here, except to point out that, when it is God directly executing judgment, it is not genocide. People who claim that God is genocidal clearly do not understand who God is in the first place. If it is the job of the Creator of the universe to hold people accountable for their actions, how is that unjust slaying, even of a people group? The article even says that millions of people died, but where do they have evidence that millions of people were alive at that time? Logically, if one were to follow the timeline of the YEC account, millions of people were not even present. Consistency is important, something the article lacks. The article, in fact, goes on to emphatically claim that the flood was not a historical event, merely ‘rich theology’, and that claiming it is real is tantamount to God being Hitler. I already addressed that Jesus Himself mentioned the Flood and the Ark as historical, so, I really do not have much to add, other than to say that the author and other like-minded individuals have most likely read the child’s guide to arguing.

    5.He basically says that the Bible is a matter of interpretation and espousing a narrow, fundamentalist, intolerant view puts Christianity in a bad light, and falsely represents Christianity as a whole, all the while saying that they do not support interpretations that are ‘clearly heretical’. Sounds pretty divisive there, to me. You know who else was divisive? Jesus: (Matthew 7:16-20, 10:34, 25:31-46)

    6.He accuses Ken Ham of attempting to brainwash and indoctrinate children as he has accused Bill Nye of doing. He appeals to the majority as well as to authority, saying that because of ‘professional consensus’ and ‘overwhelming evidence’ that dismisses Ham’s claims, his beliefs are false.

    I will point out that we should not be afraid of dissenting views, and should represent the main theory as well as the main dissenting theories, and as far as I can tell, no where did Ken Ham claim to want to silence Bill Nye, as Bill Nye has called for of those who adhere to a creationist and Bible centered worldview. I am not trying to defend Ken Ham or YECs specifically, however, this article goes above and beyond in its rhetoric and appeals to everything but what God thinks, except for a brief mention of what Jesus may think, though, the Jesus the article writer has in mind does not sound like the Jesus of the Bible.

    In conclusion, I find the article to be an emotional piece that denies the Bible with an appeal to a very human-centered philosophy. It fails to really make any strong points, other than to repetitively state that events like the Exodus and Flood are myths and not historical or scientific chronology, and that it is mere interpretation. Not to mention the fact that if an actual Flood occurred, that would make God genocidal. If that is what people walk away from the Bible nowadays, I think this quote should just about sum things up:

    H. Richard Niebuhr summarized the liberal gospel: “A God without wrath brought men without sin into a kingdom without judgment through the ministrations of a Christ without a Cross.”

    Read more: http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php

    Brother Paul speaks plainly:

    1 Thessalonians 2:4
    “Instead, just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please men, but rather God, who examines our hearts.”

    Jesus Christ even more so:

    Matthew 16:24
    [ Take Up Your Cross ] Then Jesus said to His disciples, “If anyone wants to come with Me, he must deny himself, take up his cross, and follow Me.

    Matthew 10:38
    And whoever doesn’t take up his cross and follow Me is not worthy of Me.

  8. Does that mean God was lieing when he said he would not destroy all mankind with a flood again? If this was a regional flood we have regional floods now and so it make out God to be a liar and I hope you don’t want that.

  9. i don’t understand how you tell monumental waste of money and Jorge Mario Bergoglio or Vatican are not related, i believe only the car or the clothes he wears are more pricy than the whole ark

  10. The Mesopotamian literary precursors to the biblical Noah story, and its two main story lines, are well known. So are the many aspects of the received story that cannot withstand scientific scrutiny.
    Consequently, when faith fears facts, and opts for fiction, it risks looking foolish. Rather than demonstrating character, it invites caricature.
    What the Ark Encounter project wastes, though, is more precious than the $100,000,000 it claims to have spent, for Ark Encounter has missed a marvelous opportunity. It has chosen to comfort the choir, instead of informing, challenging and elevating them. Worse, it encourages them, rewards them, for keeping their eyes and ears shut and their minds closed. There may be short term financial gain in that, but not much future. What a pity. An Ark is a terrible thing to waste.
    For more, please see http://www.judaismandscience.com/an-ark-is-a-terrible-thing-to-waste/

  11. I was at the ark today. I heard a very good talk on the tv inside the ark how to find Jesus, a very detailed way how to get born again! I heard that in a year about a million people come to visit. If half of them hears that message, he brought the gospel to more people in one year than you can in a livetime. I had lunch in that restaurant there and I heard people saying why are this people here so different?
    And you with your article might change someone else’s mind to go there. And took that chance from them to here a word of God

  12. Interesting but Jesus believed in the creation account, he was there:

    In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. (John 1:1-3)

    For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him: And he is before all things, and by him all things consist. (Colossians 1:16-17)

    “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female.’ (Mark 10:6)

    Be careful when questioning the Word of God for two signs (among many) of the last days are:

    1. (Paul’s letter to Timothy) The Spirit clearly says that in the later times some will ABANDON the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron. (1 Timothy 4:1-2)

    2. (Paul’s warning to those int he last days) Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, and saying Where is the promise of his coming? for since the the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they WILLINGLY are IGNORANT of, that BY THE WORD OF GOD the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished (aka Noah’s flood) (2 Peter 3:3-6)

    Paul goes on the Romans chapter one how the wicked and unrepentant scoff at the idea of creation and the Creator and deny the evidence in creation pointing to the Creator. Paul also states that they CHOOSE to forget the Creator because their souls have been darkened because they prefer to go after various sinful lusts and do not want to be reminded of the Creator who is also Judge. Paul starts that passage in verse 16 that he is not ashamed of the gospel and the gospel account including creation which he states an a number of letters appears foolish to the unconverted. And as for his warnings to Timothy of a falling away from the faith in the last days, can’t fall away from a faith one never professed to be a part of.

    Many Christians fail to gain victory over sin because they lack the faith to create a clean heart in us and forgive us our sins. Listen, if he can create everything in creation just by speaking then he can create a clean heart in us and transform us. The Bible is not a buffet where one can pick and choose what they want to believe. If one truly believes in God of the Bible the supernatural and miraculous shouldn’t be a stumbling block, God IS supernatural. The Bible also plainly states the angels and demons are real, as is the Devil, and heaven, and the resurrection. So many will be lost because of unbelief.

  13. Mr. Bishop in your statements about overwhelming facts that state reality and that if ones preaching goes against that reality then that preaching would be considered False Doctrine. But I must say that is exactly what the Bible teaches us about Faith itself. Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. So even if all the facts of “REALITY” say that I will die of cancer because all the Doctors and Oncolgists say the evidence is overwhelming that I will die of cancer does not make it a fact and it does not make my Faith in God that I am ALREADY healed a FALSE DOCTRINE.
    I may not fully believe that the earth is only 6000 years old but I have read my bible enough to know that the reason God destroyed everyone except Noah and his family was because Satan and his Angles had defiled creation and had mated with the daughters of man and even the beasts of the earth and had offspring from this. If these half humans of superior size strength had been allowed to live they would have eliminated God’s creation themselves. God had to have a pure line to be able to send the Savior from. And the Flood was exactly how he cleasned the earth from it being defiled.

  14. You can’t reason with delusion.

    The delusion is the comfort blanket.

    To see things clearly without answers is too painful. So clinging to the fairytale is easier.

    ‘Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.’

  15. 1- You say he’s wrong because he disagrees with most scientists, Geniuses have often disagreed with most scientists. Please present real evidence, not names. Bill Nye is a name, not evidence.

  16. You IGNORANT FOOL. Really? Your idea of “using money for the Kingdom” is the only way? Why are you so limited in your perspective?
    Consider Luke 8:26 Jesus delivers the Gadarean at a cost of roughly $200,000. That is about how much 2,000 pigs cost today at about $100 per pig, right? Was it a waste of money? Imagine how much food would have been purchased for the starving children of “Sudan” . Yet he still chose to spend it by “wasting” $200,000 on O N E DIRTY, NAKED MAN’S SOUL.
    So it may please Him to “waste” $100 Million to save just one person that may come to Him because of this attraction.
    Arrogant men trying to wrap their little brains around what the Lord wants to do for just one, just one…sinner.

  17. You should be ashamed of yourself for posting something like this. Its clearly obvious that you have not done honest research on this topic.
    May God open your eyes and heart.


  18. Saint Augustine made a similar point about Genesis several centuries ago:

    “There is knowledge to be had, after all, about the earth, about the sky, about the other elements of the world, about the movements and revolutions or even the magnitude and distances of the constellations, about the predictable eclipses of moon and sun, about the cycles of years and seasons, about the nature of animals, fruits, stones, and everything else of this kind. And it frequently happens that even non-Christians will have knowledge of this sort in a way that they can substantiate with scientific arguments or experiments. Now it is quite disgraceful and disastrous, something to be on one’s guard against at all costs, that they should ever hear Christians spouting what they claim our Christian literature has to say on these topics, and talking such nonsense that they can scarcely contain their laughter when they see them to be toto caelo,12 as the saying goes, wide of the mark. And what is so vexing is not that misguided people should be laughed at, as that our authors should be assumed by outsiders to have held such views and, to the great detriment of those about whose salvation we are so concerned, should be written off and consigned to the waste paper basket as so many ignoramuses”

Leave a Reply to Nancy Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s