2 Responses

  1. I have mixed feelings regarding this. In one sense I think it would be very interesting to walk through a full scale model of Noah’s Ark, on the other hand I thought we were supposed to focus on the sign signified, i.e. Christ and not on the sign. On the third hand there are many, many, Christians today who deny that Noah’s flood happened or that it was just a local flood, so it may have some profit in a skeptical society to have an ‘in your face’ reminder of the reality of the Word of God. On the other hand I didn’t know that Noah’s Ark had a train in it, (must be in the NIV) and the art gallery has the potential to be very antithetical to the Gospel.

    “Well, art is art, isn’t it? Still, on the other hand, water is water! And east is east and west is west and if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does… now you tell me what you know.” Groucho Marx (sorry this seemed fitting somehow.}

  2. I think it’s interesting for what it is. I think a reproduction of the ark is certainly a worthwhile think so long as it’s educational. I’m willing to say the same thing with respect to the replica tabernacle in Lancaster County, PA. We shouldn’t go there expecting a theophanic glory-spirit, but building a replica so that people can see what it looked like is certainly fine with me.

Leave a Reply