This is kind of feral. I’m atheist through and through, but there is such a thing as “Respectful debate”. Doesn’t matter how crazy the other person is, you lose the debate if you resort to name calling. Especially accusations of incest and the like.
If the billboard said something like “Come see a boat that was too small to carry all the animals in the world whilst God killed everyone and everything!” Make it snappier or less wordy though, I’d be on board. (On board. See what I did there! Dad jokes FTW!)
4 Likes
Boatload of ignorant deus-bags
Apparently, being wrong is a turn on for this type.
1 Like
2000 years of myths? The pictured ark with Noah myth is way older than that.
Focusing on 2000 years makes this a protest of Christianity, not of the museum itself. If that’s what they intend, I’m out. Not a theist myself, but I know plenty of perfectly lovely folks who are and free thinking means free thinking, not thinking exactly like others.
4 Likes
There is some fundamental difference between religion in America and religion almost everywhere else that I haven’t quite understood yet.
I grew up under the influence of watered-down Catholicism in Austria; I’ve been an atheist ever since I was 14, but Catholic Churches and liturgy still feel “holy” to me. I feel the urge to respect the place; I fall silent and think contemplative (though still atheistic) thoughts.
That feeling is not limited to the “holy places” I grew up with. Mosques, Synagogues, Hindu temples, Buddhist temples, Shinto shrines - I’ve visited them, and yes, they’ve got that certain feel, too.
American-style evangelical Christian expressions of belief, on the other hand, they feel like Disneyland to me. No resonance whatsoever. Nothing “holy”.
What’s the underlying difference that sets that apart form all the other religions of the world that I’ve encountered so far?
When a religion actively spreads the story of how God killed everybody and how he’s going to do it again to the unbelievers, it needs to be criticised. When such a religion demands respect from others, it needs mocking.
… and usually presented as either “evil” or as “collateral damage”. I have yet to see a children’s book where all the bloodthirsty wanton destruction is committed by the good guy, with the victims and the reader supposed to be thankful. Also, the readers’s parents are usually around to teach the kids that it’s just a story, and not real.
11 Likes
The 2% tax is from the Special District they set up (which is easy to do and close to impossible to dissolve). Anyone within that Special District (not just those who work there) will end up paying for that park. Special-purpose district
2 Likes
You demonstrate my point. It is impossible not to mock the beliefs of others on the internet.
2 Likes
I fear you are taking me entirely too seriously. But, you know, in the Noah story the idea that God is the “good guy” is very absent. The concept of a benevolent deity seems to be comparatively recent.
2 Likes
Not that it’s particularly more SFW or child friendly (just the opposite) but the Sumerian version (and the Akkadian version that was taken from the Sumerian version) is waaaay less confusing in this regard.
And a themepark / museum on either Sumeria or Akkadia (my preference being Sumeria … although it would be hard to talk about Akkadia without talking about Sumeria; so, Akkadia?) would be way more interesting and educational.
As for the signs, I think they’re worse than not having signs. Fundamentalist christians often see themselves (at least in America) as being actually persecuted. It’s kind of alarming. Particularly as the misconception can lead to some extremely motivated but misinformed people.
Specifically misinformed about other people, other belief systems, what other Christians believe and why, recent events, and context.
If the goal is to motivate fundamentalist christians to look into the debacle and help end it, this is exactly the wrong way to do it. If the goal is to motivate more moderate christians to look more deeply into the debacle and help end it, this is also exactly the wrong way to do it.
If the goal is to get people on the internet riled to no particular end, success I guess. There are less expensive ways to do that though.
4 Likes
Specifically: acting like assholes to the people who could stop the park isn’t going to stop the park. It is shocking, isn’t it?
1 Like
As opposed to saying nothing? I suspect that a lot of Christians don’t really think of the implications of the Flood story at all, painting it as a cute theme in nurseries and for children’s books and toys. I think plenty of them don’t consider that the Flood means genocide, and it means incest - again. Granted, when confronted with evidence that their beliefs are horrible and don’t comport with reality many will just become more fervent in their religion, but others may actually question it.
http://www.amazon.com/Awkward-Moments-Childrens-Bible-Vol/dp/149217744X
6 Likes
Theists use this “respect” card against people all the time. It’s a great way to tell people to shut up, by demanding that religion get special “respect.”
The accusations of incest aren’t “accusations” they are the actual story. They are the uncomfortable “facts” of the version of history that Ken Ham claims is true. Calling people out on their own BS isn’t name calling.
11 Likes
I’d totally visit that park!
It’s been done, sort of:
This used to be in Panama City Beach, FL.
3 Likes
But what if it has cool rides and attractions - and a giant, and I mean GIANT
ark that takes you up and down the Ohio River.
How about then?
I see your Fire Next Time and RAISE you -
Hopefully the two-of-every-kind-plus-some-spares-to-feed-the-carnivores version.
And don’t forget all the spares prey (and veggies) they’ll need for a year later when the land, seeing as how all life on earth has been wiped out and there is nothing to eat on earth - hope the fishing is good… 
1 Like
Don’t worry. I just chose to address your statement at face value; it is a valid point, after all, whether you mean it entirely seriously or not.
It is true that the “loving God” is a new idea (at most 2500 years old, I’d guess, for various interpretations of “loving”), but for the listener, that is the same person. You already need to be a bit of a blasphemer to declare “That ‘God’ guy in this OT story is definitely not the Good God I know; My God would never do that”. Or worse yet, to suggest that if God were evil, we shouldn’t worship Him.
You might know the fine points of American society better than I do; but I’d say the point is to get/keep people (of all creeds and non-creeds) used to the fact that extreme religion may be mocked.
But you know, if I told one of the “moderate” Christians that I know in person that The Flood is a story of genocide followed by incest, they would answer “Yes, it’s just an old bronze age myth”. The more religious ones will try to extract some benign message on the allegorical level.
How can I be sure? Because anyone who believes otherwise is by definition not moderate.
To achieve that end, it doesn’t really matter what you do.
Roger Bacon took from the covenant and the rainbow the idea that, as everybody sees a different rainbow, so everybody has a personal covenant with God.
It’s no wonder he was locked up for years for having dangerous thoughts.
1 Like
