…many Christians plunk down that sort of money for a summer vacation to go to six flags, Busch Gardens, or any number of other places. Many put down that sort of money to attend a couple of baseball games. Would you object to a Christian family spending that sort of money on a vacation trip to the creation museum instead? Furthermore, while we were there, we got the sense that there was a lot more diversity than simply homeschool and Christian school groups. First, there are no doubt a lot of unsaved people who might be part of homeschool or Christian school group, but second, in my conversations with Creation Museum staff, they regularly see (curious) secular (non-professing Christian) folks wander through. I can also see how this museum would be helpful for Christians unfamiliar with the genesis account of creation to be able to learn and grow via their experience there.
The pizza was fair, but the burgers were quite good.
1 Corinthians 3:10, “According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder (ἀρχιτέκτων) I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it.”
“but we are not going to win any debates on proving creation through science or trying to disprove evolution”
I also wanted to respond to this sentence. The Creation museum right there in the very first display presents the idea that what we have is common evidence. Whether one is an evolutionist or believes in creation, everyone has the same evidence. Its just that one person’s presupposition/starting place is different from another’s, and so different conclusions are drawn from the same evidence. Their display had two wax-figure archeologists working on a dig, one an evolutionist and the other who believed in creation. It was very tastefully done and setup the idea right at the start that the creation museum isn’t about trying to “prove” the case of creation, but rather, here is the evidence, and here is the framework through which a Bible-believer sees the evidence, how it fits, and now as you leave, come to your own conclusion. And in the process they did an effective job of laying out the gospel message.
But if people see it the other way, why do you care?
I don’t think I ever said that I care about how people spend their money on a vacation. What I was objecting to is whether the $100’s of millions of dollars to build this, the ark and other things, is the wisest use of God’s money. Christ didn’t need a museum or expensive facility to teach the gospel. We don’t need 1) a museum to teach our kids what the Bible says about Creation, and 2) we don’t need this museum to bring others to Christ.
With all of that said, this was everyone elses money and time will tell on whether it was wisely spent. My personal opinion, is that I don’t think it was the wisest way to spend the money. But again that is my personal opinion.
“but we are not going to win any debates on proving creation through science or trying to disprove evolution”
I also wanted to respond to this sentence. The Creation museum right there in the very first display presents the idea that what we have is common evidence. Whether one is an evolutionist or believes in creation, everyone has the same evidence. Its just that one person’s presupposition/starting place is different from another’s, and so different conclusions are drawn from the same evidence. Their display had two wax-figure archeologists working on a dig, one an evolutionist and the other who believed in creation. It was very tastefully done and setup the idea right at the start that the creation museum isn’t about trying to “prove” the case of creation, but rather, here is the evidence, and here is the framework through which a Bible-believer sees the evidence, how it fits, and now as you leave, come to your own conclusion. And in the process they did an effective job of laying out the gospel message.
I am intimately familiar with the approach they have taken, and understand exactly how it is framed. I still state, that trying to get general revelation to match perfectly with special revelation for an activity that 1) was a supernatural event and therefore outside of the realms of evidence, scientific theory and general revelation and 2) no human has observed is a practice in futility. We believe in Creation because 1) it is taught in Scripture, and 2) to believe in evolution, theistic evolution, day age theory…… bring up numerous theological conundrums that cannot be solved (i.e. literal Adam, original sin…..). The reason why it is futile is because the evidence and arguments are constantly changing, because science constantly changes. Science is not permanent in the same way Special Revelation in Scripture is permanent. If you don’t believe this take a look at the arguments by Creation Scientists in the 1970’s against evolution. Almost all arguments have been proven to be either false or fraught with issues by the leading creation scientists. Remember the “canopy theory” and other theories around carbon dating and such. They have all been abandoned by creation scientists (although a few do still espouse it). The items that we argue about today will also be thrown out. So I find it extremely futile (and also I believe a leading cause why young fundamentalist in our conservative Bible colleges are leaving 6-day creationism in droves), to constantly be arguing against evolution scientists and using scientific arguments to show science in a different light as it relates to evolution.
With that said, I do find the arguments fascinating, and I am sure I would find the museum fascinating. Just in the same way I would find a museum dedicated to the Chicago Bears should they decide to setup one in Jacksonille, Florida where I can visit all the time. But that doesn’t mean I think it is the best use of money.
Christ also didn’t need summer camps, mission agencies, Bible colleges, seminaries, state church associations, music groups, book publishers, or Christian radio. The point is, these organizations are tools. Everyone can support or not support any of these organizations based on how they believe God would lead them to donate their monies. But just because one may feel led to not support an organization financially, one should understand that perhaps others might feel so led, and so one can extend the grace of Christ toward them realizing that God can work in marvelous ways—and accomplish things that we did not anticipate.
“I am intimately familiar with the approach they have taken, and understand exactly how it is framed.
…
We believe in Creation because 1) it is taught in Scripture, and 2) to believe in evolution, theistic evolution, day age theory…… bring up numerous theological conundrums that cannot be solved (i.e. literal Adam, original sin…..).”
And yet that is exactly what the Creation Museum does. They embrace the special revelation right from the start, that creation is taught in Scripture. And most of what is displayed throughout the museum is gospel content. Teaching the Bible via visual display. I didn’t sense at all that they were engaged in mere futile intellectual reasoning—they embraced the authority of Scripture throughout.
I agree with you that you would find the museum fascinating. So why not give it a chance, and see what you think of it?
Christ also didn’t need summer camps, mission agencies, Bible colleges, seminaries, state church associations, music groups, book publishers, or Christian radio. The point is, these organizations are tools. Everyone can support or not support any of these organizations based on how they believe God would lead them to donate their monies. But just because one may feel led to not support an organization financially, one should understand that perhaps others might feel so led, and so one can extend the grace of Christ toward them realizing that God can work in marvelous ways—and accomplish things that we did not anticipate.
And yet there are good men who disagree with certain elements of these. I think my grace extends to the fact that I 1) am not stating to abolish the creation museum, 2) not calling those who support or attend the creation museum in sin. These are all brothers in Christ, and 3) not stating that no one should go. That is where my grace extends.
I am stating that in my personal opinion, I do not think this is the best use of our money. But that is my opinion. And again, in my opinion, I think better effort is spent not on discussing the science, but discussing the theology. I think the theological constructs around creation is a better focus and a more compelling argument for believing in creation than trying to examine the science (which often isn’t even done well by creation scientists).
Jim, thankfully the creation museum also has a planetarium and observatory, botanical gardens, and petting zoo. So there are multiple ways to learn about creation there.
dgszweda, thankfully the creation museum discusses and presents theology. I admit I was skeptical before I attended the place, but when I saw how soundly they made the Scriptures their platform and how they were committed to presenting the gospel, I realized this wasn’t yesterday’s “Dr. Dino” presentation.
Darrell, let me say a word of thankful agreement for your posts on this thread. I returned from a first time visit to the museum with my family of four a couple weeks ago. I was initially skeptical that it would come across as “hokey.” It did not. The gospel presentation was done very well. The gardens were impressive. And it was good to meet n greet believers from different church backgrounds at, yes, Noah’s cafe. I saw a several Amish and Mennonite families there for example.
I had free admission as an active duty service member, and the family in front of us in line handed us a free ticket they didn’t need. So my family got in at 50% off. I’d wait awhile, but would go back again. It was well worth it, and I believe a good “investment” for Christian families in addition to supporting their missionaries and local churches—why can’t we support both?
Yeah, I’m not sure comparing the Creation Museum to a museum dedicated to the Chicago Bears really helps your argument.
Agreed. This would be much better:
I’m not sure comparing the Creation Museum to a museum dedicated to the Chicago Bears Philadelphia Eagles really helps your argument.
I’d take the Eagles museum over the Creation Museum in a heartbeat. As it is, I’ll take the Creation Museum over Da Bears.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells
Discussion
NewOK
But if people see it the other way, why do you care?
NewFair enough but...
…many Christians plunk down that sort of money for a summer vacation to go to six flags, Busch Gardens, or any number of other places. Many put down that sort of money to attend a couple of baseball games. Would you object to a Christian family spending that sort of money on a vacation trip to the creation museum instead? Furthermore, while we were there, we got the sense that there was a lot more diversity than simply homeschool and Christian school groups. First, there are no doubt a lot of unsaved people who might be part of homeschool or Christian school group, but second, in my conversations with Creation Museum staff, they regularly see (curious) secular (non-professing Christian) folks wander through. I can also see how this museum would be helpful for Christians unfamiliar with the genesis account of creation to be able to learn and grow via their experience there.
The pizza was fair, but the burgers were quite good.
NewIf only the Apostle Paul would have thought of that!
1 Corinthians 3:10, “According to the grace of God which was given to me, as a wise master builder (ἀρχιτέκτων) I have laid the foundation, and another builds on it. But let each one take heed how he builds on it.”
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement
New"but we are not going to win..."
“but we are not going to win any debates on proving creation through science or trying to disprove evolution”
I also wanted to respond to this sentence. The Creation museum right there in the very first display presents the idea that what we have is common evidence. Whether one is an evolutionist or believes in creation, everyone has the same evidence. Its just that one person’s presupposition/starting place is different from another’s, and so different conclusions are drawn from the same evidence. Their display had two wax-figure archeologists working on a dig, one an evolutionist and the other who believed in creation. It was very tastefully done and setup the idea right at the start that the creation museum isn’t about trying to “prove” the case of creation, but rather, here is the evidence, and here is the framework through which a Bible-believer sees the evidence, how it fits, and now as you leave, come to your own conclusion. And in the process they did an effective job of laying out the gospel message.
NewMark_Smith wrote: But if
I don’t think I ever said that I care about how people spend their money on a vacation. What I was objecting to is whether the $100’s of millions of dollars to build this, the ark and other things, is the wisest use of God’s money. Christ didn’t need a museum or expensive facility to teach the gospel. We don’t need 1) a museum to teach our kids what the Bible says about Creation, and 2) we don’t need this museum to bring others to Christ.
With all of that said, this was everyone elses money and time will tell on whether it was wisely spent. My personal opinion, is that I don’t think it was the wisest way to spend the money. But again that is my personal opinion.
NewDarrell Post wrote: "but we..."
I am intimately familiar with the approach they have taken, and understand exactly how it is framed. I still state, that trying to get general revelation to match perfectly with special revelation for an activity that 1) was a supernatural event and therefore outside of the realms of evidence, scientific theory and general revelation and 2) no human has observed is a practice in futility. We believe in Creation because 1) it is taught in Scripture, and 2) to believe in evolution, theistic evolution, day age theory…… bring up numerous theological conundrums that cannot be solved (i.e. literal Adam, original sin…..). The reason why it is futile is because the evidence and arguments are constantly changing, because science constantly changes. Science is not permanent in the same way Special Revelation in Scripture is permanent. If you don’t believe this take a look at the arguments by Creation Scientists in the 1970’s against evolution. Almost all arguments have been proven to be either false or fraught with issues by the leading creation scientists. Remember the “canopy theory” and other theories around carbon dating and such. They have all been abandoned by creation scientists (although a few do still espouse it). The items that we argue about today will also be thrown out. So I find it extremely futile (and also I believe a leading cause why young fundamentalist in our conservative Bible colleges are leaving 6-day creationism in droves), to constantly be arguing against evolution scientists and using scientific arguments to show science in a different light as it relates to evolution.
With that said, I do find the arguments fascinating, and I am sure I would find the museum fascinating. Just in the same way I would find a museum dedicated to the Chicago Bears should they decide to setup one in Jacksonille, Florida where I can visit all the time. But that doesn’t mean I think it is the best use of money.
NewChrist also didn't need...
Christ also didn’t need summer camps, mission agencies, Bible colleges, seminaries, state church associations, music groups, book publishers, or Christian radio. The point is, these organizations are tools. Everyone can support or not support any of these organizations based on how they believe God would lead them to donate their monies. But just because one may feel led to not support an organization financially, one should understand that perhaps others might feel so led, and so one can extend the grace of Christ toward them realizing that God can work in marvelous ways—and accomplish things that we did not anticipate.
New"I am intimately familiar with the approach they have taken"
“I am intimately familiar with the approach they have taken, and understand exactly how it is framed.
…
We believe in Creation because 1) it is taught in Scripture, and 2) to believe in evolution, theistic evolution, day age theory…… bring up numerous theological conundrums that cannot be solved (i.e. literal Adam, original sin…..).”
And yet that is exactly what the Creation Museum does. They embrace the special revelation right from the start, that creation is taught in Scripture. And most of what is displayed throughout the museum is gospel content. Teaching the Bible via visual display. I didn’t sense at all that they were engaged in mere futile intellectual reasoning—they embraced the authority of Scripture throughout.
I agree with you that you would find the museum fascinating. So why not give it a chance, and see what you think of it?
NewYeah, I'm not sure comparing
Yeah, I’m not sure comparing the Creation Museum to a museum dedicated to the Chicago Bears really helps your argument.
-------
Greg Long, Ed.D. (SBTS)
Pastor of Adult Ministries
Grace Church, Des Moines, IA
Adjunct Instructor
School of Divinity
Liberty University
NewGreg Long wrote: Yeah, I'm
Depends which you like better :)
NewMight not someone learn more about creation at say ....
Might not someone learn more about creation at say ….
While:
Twitter
Jim's Doctrinal Statement
NewDarrell Post wrote: Christ
And yet there are good men who disagree with certain elements of these. I think my grace extends to the fact that I 1) am not stating to abolish the creation museum, 2) not calling those who support or attend the creation museum in sin. These are all brothers in Christ, and 3) not stating that no one should go. That is where my grace extends.
I am stating that in my personal opinion, I do not think this is the best use of our money. But that is my opinion. And again, in my opinion, I think better effort is spent not on discussing the science, but discussing the theology. I think the theological constructs around creation is a better focus and a more compelling argument for believing in creation than trying to examine the science (which often isn’t even done well by creation scientists).
NewJim, thankfully the creation
Jim, thankfully the creation museum also has a planetarium and observatory, botanical gardens, and petting zoo. So there are multiple ways to learn about creation there.
dgszweda, thankfully the creation museum discusses and presents theology. I admit I was skeptical before I attended the place, but when I saw how soundly they made the Scriptures their platform and how they were committed to presenting the gospel, I realized this wasn’t yesterday’s “Dr. Dino” presentation.
NewJust visited the museum
Darrell, let me say a word of thankful agreement for your posts on this thread. I returned from a first time visit to the museum with my family of four a couple weeks ago. I was initially skeptical that it would come across as “hokey.” It did not. The gospel presentation was done very well. The gardens were impressive. And it was good to meet n greet believers from different church backgrounds at, yes, Noah’s cafe. I saw a several Amish and Mennonite families there for example.
I had free admission as an active duty service member, and the family in front of us in line handed us a free ticket they didn’t need. So my family got in at 50% off. I’d wait awhile, but would go back again. It was well worth it, and I believe a good “investment” for Christian families in addition to supporting their missionaries and local churches—why can’t we support both?
NewHumor
Agreed. This would be much better:
I’d take the Eagles museum over the Creation Museum in a heartbeat. As it is, I’ll take the Creation Museum over Da Bears.
"Our task today is to tell people — who no longer know what sin is...no longer see themselves as sinners, and no longer have room for these categories — that Christ died for sins of which they do not think they’re guilty." - David Wells