BiblicalInsights.net

Have you noticed the upsurge in the popularity of Noah’s Ark?  Answers in Genesis hpes to build a full-scale ark in a theme park at Williamstown, KY at a cost of $73 million.  God’s ark of Safety is being built in Frostburg, MD.  It is still under construction.  In December, 2012, Johan Huibers became the first to build a full-sized ark that actually floats–Ark Van Noach in Dordrecht, Netherlands.  A full-size replica of Noah’s ark was built in Ma Wan Island, Hong Kong in 2009.  A two-thirds replica is being built by Paul Smith in Florenceville, New Brunswick.  There is an ark inside the Cornerstone church in San Antonio, TX that is a $5 million, two-story, Disney-style attraction, complete with animatronic animals.  An ark is planned for Yerevan, Armenia that would be built in sight of Mt. Ararat.  It would be the center of a theme park.

Why Is Noah’s Ark So Popular Today?  I would like to give five reasons that express my own thoughts concerning this subject.
First, the ark represents safety in the midst of a great storm.  When it rains for 40 days and 40 nights, you need some place to get out of the storm!  When the storms of life come, where do you go?  Read Psa. 46:1 and 57:1.  Where could you go, but to the Lord?  Our ark of safety today is “in Christ” and “in the church of Christ.”  Only “in Christ” do we have real peace, safety, and salvation.
Second, the ark represents heroic effort.  The story of the ark is the story of the faith of one man, Noah, who was one in a billion!  Yes, the estimated population of the earth in Noah’s day was one billion.  Noah was the only father who saved his family.  Noah’s faith was real (Heb. 11:7).  Noah’s faith was complete.  He did all that God commanded him to do.  He built the ark–a gigantic task for his day.  Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.  We need heroes of faith today!
Third, the ark represents God’s faithfulness.  God was faithful to His word of judgment against the wickedness and violence in the earth (Gen. 6:5-7).  God was also faithful to His promise to preserve Noah and his family in the ark (Gen. 6:8).  God was faithful to His word of promise after the flood, i.e. not to destroy the earth by water again.  The rainbow is a sign of this promise.  God’s faithfulness gives us certainty in the midst of uncertainty.
Fourth, the ark represents peace in the midst of turmoil.  The waters of the flood were ferocious and frightening.  But, inside the ark, there was peace.  The waters destroyed the inhabitants of the earth who did not fear God.  But, the same waters lifted the ark to safety (I Pet. 3:20-21).  God’s judgment is real.  The ungodly shall perish.  We can be saved from God’s wrath through Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:8-9).  We can have peace through Jesus Christ (Rom. 5:1).
Fifth, the ark represents hope.  Hope, that while others perish, we can be saved.  Hope that we can have a new beginning with God and in Christ.  Hope that is anchored to the promises of God.  Hope that all is well with us because we have hid our lives in Christ where all spiritual blessings reside (Col. 3:3; Eph. 1:3).
Why is the ark so popular?  Men and women still need salvation, peace, and hope.  In short, we still need God.  We need a place where we can preserve our souls.  That place is “in Christ.”  (Gal. 3:26-27).

F. LaGard Smith in his book, Fallen Spiritual Leaders, has a chapter dealing with parachurch organizations.  Some of the thoughts he conveys in that chapter are given below.

Definition of parachurch organizations.  “Parachurch includes the hundreds of independent religious organizations throughout the country–sometimes involved in radio and television programs–and other church-related, yet church-distinct organizaions.  The parachurch phenomenon is a hungry beast which never stops being hungry.  Over and over again it demands to be fed.  It growls and threatens disaster if you ignore it. And even when you feed it, it can turn on you.  It can devour its superstar trainers and often bites the hands that feed it” (p. 84).

Distinction between parachurch organizations and the church.  “The very word “parachurch” ought to be a clue.  “Parachurch” is not the church (church of Christ-DS).  “Parachurch is something other than the church, something beyond the church.  It is the church Christ died for, not the “parachurch.”  It is the church that is the bride of Christ, not the “parachurch.”  It is the church to which the saved are added, not the “parachurch.” It is through the church that the manifold wisdom of God is made known, not through the “parachurch” (p. 84).  “There are essential and functional differences between the church and parachurch organizations.  For the church, there is a scriptural pattern of work and worship.  For parachurch organizations, human creativity is the limit of all possibilities.  For the church, financial solvency follows from biblical principles of cheerful giving.  For parachurch organizations, there is too much evidence of giving done from emotinoal coercion, guilt, and gimmickry.  For the church, financial accountability is the responsibility of grassroots spiritual oversight.  For parachurch organizations, financial accountability may be the sole responsibility of next of kin” (pp. 84-85).  “Parachurch means like the church, but not the same.  Similar but different.  And, just as with dangerous frauds, the greater the similarity, the greater the deception” (p. 85).

Dangers of parachurch organizations.  Speaking of Christian colleges, Smith remarks, “By virtue of sheer visibility, fiscal superiority, and scope of influence, Christian colleges can actually dwarf the churches with which they are tied.  It can happen when highly respected university leaders are perceived to speak on behalf of the church itself; when what is taught at Christian colleges influences the thinking of the church in the next generation; and when Christian college campuses become the “Mars Hills” of doctrinal discussion” (p. 87).  “The risks of parachurch organizatons, in whatever form they might exist, always seem the same.  When we look in every respect like the church, but are in fact different from the church, we are bound to confuse a lot of people, often even ourselves” (p. 87).  Speaking of various scandals found among parachurch organizations, Smith states, “The plain fact is that church-related organizations are far more susceptible to this kind of disgrace than is the church itself.  It’s a timely reminder that God set up the church as he intended it, in order to carry out his work on earth.  We have no reason to tamper with his divine plan” (p. 90).
Think on these things!