Unsettled Christianity

• Build a porn shop – which is just about what the Ark Park is – but not with tax dollars
• Like the porn shops, the Ark Park presents an unfaithful view of various things and positions unattainable. Both are disgusting because both prey on human weaknesses.
• Yes, the porn shop comments stands. Both are charging people for something that is simply not true but passing it off as it is.

Here’s the deal. It is. The Ark Park is a grand scheme meant to sell something not true, devalues the message and belittles God’s Creation. Both present pictures of things that will never be yours and didn’t exist until someone got skill and wanted to sell a message. Further, again, both so devalue God’s Creation and try to profit from it.

Now, I’ve been criticized for that stance as saying something ungodly. Obviously these people, as they haven’t with Genesis, never thought to pick up Ezekiel. Ezekiel uses sexual imagery to go after Israel in a very vulgar way. Now, most people of the YEC ilk seem to read Ezekiel 37-39, but read a few of those other chapters (try 16 and 23) and see what YHWH and His prophet said about Jerusalem. Am I saying anything different than Ezekiel? Nope. Now, (Don’t Ask Questions) Answers in Genesis visited the site the other day and well… took offense. And they wrote a story about it. Kudos to them for having the courage to link to me (UPDATE 20:10, 6/15 – They removed the link. Cowards). Ken Ham, once, in writing a response to James McGrath, didn’t link to him. When you do those things, it is a cowardly act, so, let me again offer kudos for it – although the didn’t link to one of the posts mentioned.

For the record – I maintain the fact that tax dollars are being used for the Park and that yes, the Ark Park is comparable to a porn shop for reasons listed above. Again, read Ezekiel.

I have to ask myself – with all of the posts on Ken Ham and the various ones on the Mythological Adam – why now? Maybe they took offense to the porn shop thing…

Anyway…. as usual they call me a ‘and self-proclaimed Christian’. This is used regularly against those who challenge the snake-oil which AiG is selling (get it? snake-oil?). Now, when you read their story, you’ll notice that they claim several things. Moving the goal posts, I did not. Neither did Rodney. Rodney is far more libertarian than I, but I might would consider his viewpoint if given enough time.

It is a dishonest ministry, as Ham’s former partner would attest.

I notice that they write -

including a hand-waving claim—without substantiation—that he had not been changing the subject:

I don’t get that – why would I have to substantiate a claim made against me? (Oh, that’s right. AiG is a master of the argumentum ad ignorantiam. I refuse to participate in such things)

They go to write:

In a later addition to his blog, Joel dug another hole for himself. He made the charge (also stated by Rev. Lynn) that AiG intends to place the mythical unicorn on our proposed Ark. For a refutation of that false claim, read Unicorns in the Bible?

But, you see - this is my actual post. They are actually trying to separate the idea of a mythical unicorn and a real unicorn. At that point, sane people need to leave AiG alone. Now, I’m not going to say that they lied and misrepresented me. Oh wait, yes I am. They, like they have for others, lied and misrepresentation my view point. Then, to top it off, they quote a commentator know for using multiple names who took me out of context.

For fun, here is a transcript of an interview which Anderson Cooper interviews Barry Lynn, Ken Ham and has Jeff Toobin as a legal analyst.