"This doctrine of six day creation was ... the consensus of the theologians, ministers and elders at the Westminster Assembly"

and again I believe my overall point was being charitable toward other believers whose vision for a ministry tool is not the same as one’s own. That was my initial point on this thread. I am in no position to build a project like Ham envisions, so I do other things. But I want to take great care in being critical, or worse, mocking [not saying you were] a brother who wants to implement a project that in the end, God may very well use. I just wanted to encourage folks to not end up throwing rocks at someone God is using….just because one disagrees with the tool. I have not done all the research Ham has done into this particular method of gaining a hearing, and I am willing to be charitable and wish that God would use it.

Amen, brother. I’m 100% in agreement with you. What some seem not to have asked themselves is, “What if God has called Ken Ham to undertake this project?” I would not want to have to explain to Him why I mocked someone He may have called to do a particular task. At the very least, this could be a useful educational tool for Christians. Just going by the dimensions listed in the Bible I had no earthly idea how big the ark was. To find out it was as big as an aircraft carrier simply boggled my mind and showed me an even deeper perspective of the Creator and Redeemer.

I think it would have been helpful for this discussion if a NT author, like Peter maybe, referred to the ark in some way and then presented Jesus as the antitype. Had that happened, then it would be obvious how the ark could have relevance to a salvation message. If only Jesus maybe referred to Noah and massive destruction in a way that would indicate severe wrath was coming. Sometimes I beat my head against the wall wishing such obvious things would have been employed.

[James K]

I think it would have been helpful for this discussion if a NT author, like Peter maybe, referred to the ark in some way and then presented Jesus as the antitype. Had that happened, then it would be obvious how the ark could have relevance to a salvation message. If only Jesus maybe referred to Noah and massive destruction in a way that would indicate severe wrath was coming. Sometimes I beat my head against the wall wishing such obvious things would have been employed.

Peter did mention the ark; it’s recorded in 1 Peter 3:18-22

[DwightD]

[James K]

I think it would have been helpful for this discussion if a NT author, like Peter maybe, referred to the ark in some way and then presented Jesus as the antitype. Had that happened, then it would be obvious how the ark could have relevance to a salvation message. If only Jesus maybe referred to Noah and massive destruction in a way that would indicate severe wrath was coming. Sometimes I beat my head against the wall wishing such obvious things would have been employed.

Peter did mention the ark; it’s recorded in 1 Peter 3:18-22. And Jesus mentioned Noah in His Olivet Discourse, Msatthew 24:37-39; Luke 17:26-27

[Ron Bean]

There have been fundamentalists who have held to a literal six day creation but not to that of a young earth.

Silly gappers! ;-)

I hold firmly to a literal 6-day creation and to a young earth as do all my fundamentalist friends I associate with. It’s the only way to go