Anyone following the latest on Noah's Ark?

FSSL

FSSL

Well-known member
Staff member
Administrator
Doctor
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
8,005
Reaction score
828
Points
113
Location
Gulf Shores, Alabama
I find this fascinating... unlike Ken Hamm who has already dismissed this.

www.facebook.com

Noah's Ark Scans

Noah's Ark Scans. 245,727 likes · 173,683 talking about this. Guardians of the Ark. Archeological Research team led by Andrew Jones || Help us core drill this fall: GiveSendgo.com/NoahsArk2026
www.facebook.com www.facebook.com
 
Wasn't that boat-shaped feature identified by Ron Wyatt, known archeaological mountebank, as Noah's Ark?
 
Noah's Ark Scan, or Scam? It's too soon to tell. Let's wait until the evidence is in.

"Even Young Earth creationists at the Christian apologetics ministry Answers in Genesis said they 'will withhold judgment until further study.' 'Over the decades, we have learned to be cautious about such Ark claims,' it reported Tuesday."

www.christiantoday.com.au

Claim of finding the Noah's Ark no different from others before, says experts

Despite the notable lack of significant evidence, the media and the blogosphere are abuzz over the cries of a team of Chinese and Turkish explorers who claim that the wooden structure they found on Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey is none other than Noah's Ark.
www.christiantoday.com.au www.christiantoday.com.au

Ron Wyatt was a notorious fraud, but he's now dead. I can't tell if the latest "discovery" has anything to do with Wyatt's claims. Wyatt said he found a boatlike structure on Mt. Ararat using dowsing rods, which he claimed was the Ark.

"Wyatt's work has been broadly discredited by historians, archeologists and geologists. Archeologists, biblical scholars and fellow creationists and Seventh Day Adventists criticized his claims and his reticence to having the samples scientifically tested, 'believing that he was naïve at best and a fraud at worst.' Geologist Elizabeth Gierlowski-Kordesh concluded that his claims were baseless and accused him of practicing 'junk science.' However his lack of credentials and his ostracism from academic recognition was seen by some Christian communities as adding to his stature and credibility."

en.wikipedia.org

Ron Wyatt - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
I believe Ron Wyatt's theory that the crossing of the Red Sea at the Sea of Aquba is plausible but it appears that he fabricated much of the evidence including the remains of chariot wheels that no one else is able to find.

If they are doing research at the actual Ararat site, this would be a good thing but whatever findings has no bearing whatsoever on my belief that the biblical account of the flood is very much true.
 
Last edited:
I thought this story had been discredited as a fabrication a long time ago.

Ron Wyatt also claimed to have discovered the Ark of the Covenant buried beneath the site of the crucifixion, but failed to provide any evidence.
 
Noah's Ark sightings, like sightings of Bigfoot, Elvis and the Loch Ness monster, are notoriously difficult to pin down and document.

Did you hear the one about the explorers who found Noah's Ark, but they couldn't get too close? It's now being used as a Yeti longhouse. :cool:
 
Terry said:
Ron Wyatt also claimed to have discovered the Ark of the Covenant buried beneath the site of the crucifixion, but failed to provide any evidence.
Click to expand...

Most professional archaeologists go their entire careers without a major discovery. Wyatt, a complete amateur, apparently found all the good stuff. If there was a Nobel Prize for archaeology, he'd have won them regularly. Fortunately, there isn't a Nobel Prize for phonies.

If Noah's Ark existed, it would be yet another piece of physical evidence validating the historicity of the Bible. But nothing in the Christian faith requires that Noah's Ark be extant. In fact it strains credulity to expect that a 5,000-year-old wooden boat would still be around and identifiable.

My personal theory is that after landing on a mountaintop in a world where all the animal life had died and probably a good portion of the plant life, the ark would have been a handy source of lumber for building, at least until the trees grew back.
 
Ransom said:
My personal theory is that after landing on a mountaintop in a world where all the animal life had died and probably a good portion of the plant life, the ark would have been a handy source of lumber for building, at least until the trees grew back.
Click to expand...

The dove had flown back with an olive leaf shortly after the water subsided, so we know that some trees had survived and probably took a little while to start yielding fruit again. I think there's a lot in the Genesis flood account that could be taken allegorically, so the lack of physical evidence has never really been a problem for me.
 
... and our Christian faith is neither confirmed nor bolstered if Noah's Ark is found.
 
ALAYMAN said:
What is it that you asserted which you expected a rebuttal? The hermeneutical approach of allegorizing scripture?
Click to expand...

I try not to allegorize Scripture as much as possible, but geoscience doesn't seem to support a world wide flood.

At most, we could say that it was a local flood for what was the known world at the time, and terms such as "40 days and 40 nights" are Hebrew idioms for basically saying an extended length of time. Whether or not you want to interpret it literally or figuratively, the message that is intended to be communicated is the same.

I recognize that I'll probably get a lot of pushback for that, but I would expect something more than "yikes" if someone wants to have an intelligent conversation and tell me where I'm wrong.
 
Double yikes! I'm struggling to stay alive since I took the Adsense off this site... I might have time to post more in a minute when my boss let's me have more time.
 
FSSL said:
Double yikes! I'm struggling to stay alive since I took the Adsense off this site... I might have time to post more in a minute when my boss let's me have more time.
Click to expand...

You're bringing that up again? In that case, you should also start looking into your moderators and send me a record of what they've been up to over the last couple of days... if you have the time, of course.
 
Terry said:
I try not to allegorize Scripture as much as possible, but geoscience doesn't seem to support a world wide flood.

At most, we could say that it was a local flood for what was the known world at the time, and terms such as "40 days and 40 nights" are Hebrew idioms for basically saying an extended length of time. Whether or not you want to interpret it literally or figuratively, the message that is intended to be communicated is the same.

I recognize that I'll probably get a lot of pushback for that, but I would expect something more than "yikes" if someone wants to have an intelligent conversation and tell me where I'm wrong.
Click to expand...
The number 40 days is not an idiom. They are normal days. Moses, the writer, always uses the word "yom" to refer to a normal day.

When Moses says Noah was 600 years, is that an idiom as well?

Allegorical interpretations are not the same as a historical/grammatical approach to Scripture.
 
Ekklesian said:
If it were found, it would be tremendous boon, as were the prints of the nails to Thomas.
Click to expand...
"Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed" (John 20:29).
 
FSSL said:
The number 40 days is not an idiom. They are normal days. Moses, the writer, always uses the word "yom" to refer to a normal day.
Click to expand...

In ancient Hebrew tradition and scriptural writing, the number 40 represents a full measure of time necessary to accomplish a divine purpose, judgment, or transformation.

FSSL said:
When Moses says Noah was 600 years, is that an idiom as well?
Click to expand...

I have no problem interpreting the age of Noah, along with other genealogies listed that show humans living for hundreds of years, since there's nothing in the original languages that indicates it should be understood otherwise.

FSSL said:
Allegorical interpretations are not the same as a historical/grammatical approach to Scripture.
Click to expand...

It's all about finding the right balance, which is something that I know is difficult to do around here.
 
First, idioms are not the same as allegory. Idiomatic sayings are understood normally in their context. They are not allegory.

I maintain that these were normal days.

Moses also used "forty days" to compare to "forty years." Not exactly idiomatic.

Numbers 13:25 The spies were gone for forty days

Numbers 14 "For forty years—one year for each of the forty days you explored the land—you will suffer for your sins and know what it is like to have me against you.’

BALANCE: you have yet to prove you are the standard... 🤦🏻‍♂️

A historical/grammatical approach does not rely on "finding balance." It relies on the normal meaning of words and their usage by the same author.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top