Noah's Ark

[East of Eden]

Anyone want to speculate how a large boat got on top of a 13,000' mountain?




Has Noah's Ark Been Found on Turkish Mountaintop?

FOXNews.com

The remains of Noah's Ark have been discovered 13,000 feet up a Turkish mountain -- according to a sensational claim by evangelical explorers.


printemailshare recommend (17)
Noah’s Ark Ministries International

An explorer examines wooden beams inside what some are nearly certain is the remains of Noah's Ark.

A group of Chinese and Turkish evangelical explorers say wooden remains they have discovered on Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey are the remains of Noah's Ark.

The group claims that carbon dating proves the relics are 4,800 years old, meaning they date to around the same time the ark was said to be afloat. Mt. Ararat has long been suspected as the final resting place of the craft by evangelicals and literalists hoping to validate biblical stories.

Yeung Wing-Cheung, from the Noah's Ark Ministries International research team that made the discovery, said: "It's not 100 percent that it is Noah's Ark, but we think it is 99.9 percent that this is it."

There have been several reported discoveries of the remains of Noah's Ark over the years, most notably a find by archaeologist Ron Wyatt in 1987. At the time, the Turkish government officially declared a national park around his find, a boat-shaped object stretched across the mountains of Ararat.

Nevertheless, the evangelical ministry remains convinced that the current find is in fact more likely to be the actual artifact, calling upon Dutch Ark researcher Gerrit Aalten to verify its legitimacy.

“The significance of this find is that for the first time in history the discovery of Noah’s Ark is well documented and revealed to the worldwide community,� Aalten said at a press conference announcing the find. Citing the many details that match historical accounts of the Ark, he believes it to be a legitimate archaeological discovery.

“There’s a tremendous amount of solid evidence that the structure found on Mount Ararat in Eastern Turkey is the legendary Ark of Noah,� said Aalten.

Representatives of Noah's Ark Ministries said the structure contained several compartments, some with wooden beams, that they believe were used to house animals.The group of evangelical archaeologists ruled out an established human settlement on the grounds none have ever been found above 11,000 feet in the vicinity, Yeung said.

During the press conference, team member Panda Lee described visiting the site. “In October 2008, I climbed the mountain with the Turkish team. At an elevation of more than 4,000 meters, I saw a structure built with plank-like timber. Each plank was about 8 inches wide. I could see tenons, proof of ancient construction predating the use of metal nails."

We walked about 100 meters to another site. I could see broken wood fragments embedded in a glacier, and some 20 meters long. I surveyed the landscape and found that the wooden structure was permanently covered by ice and volcanic rocks."

Local Turkish officials will ask the central government in Ankara to apply for UNESCO World Heritage status so the site can be protected while a major archaeological dig is conducted.

The biblical story says that God decided to flood the Earth after seeing how corrupt it was. He then told Noah to build an ark and fill it with two of every animal species.

After the flood waters receded, the Bible says, the ark came to rest on a mountain. Many believe that Mount Ararat, the highest point in the region, is where the ark and her inhabitants ran aground.

[whirlwind]

It is sad when some simply see the letter and not the spirit.

Like you fail to see the divine inspiration behind the Qur'an?

I believe it's inspired too. I wouldn't call it Divine however.

[Crazy Ivan]

I believe it's inspired too. I wouldn't call it Divine however.

"Inspired" by what? Muslims see the "divine spirit" beyond the "letter". Why can't you?

[sickles]

how come half the time these threads turn into taking pot shots, argueing over definitions or semantics, or take off at an obtuse angle?

[Greatest I Am]

Responding as a debater

I will do my best but you must recognize the difficulty in being civil with those who applaud the genocide of man.

I may lack the word to be civil with those who are acting in an uncivilized way and are traitors to humanity.

Could you be civil with Hitler or Stalin?

Yes. Just as civil as the Nuremberg trials were.

Then again, perhaps I should not be asking you because, if I recall correctly, you also have no problems with God's genocide of man.

I am not sure where you would have gotten that idea.

Jester does.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I Am]

The Japan nukings were completely justified, and probably saved hundreds of thousands of Japanese and US lives. Even so, there were elements in the Japanese military who didn't want to surrender after two nukes. The point is if finite and fallen man can make a decision like that, God can. If you can create life, you can take it.

I find it interesting that some who make the argument that a woman can 'do what she wants with her own body', i.e. abortion, deny God the right to do as He wills with His creation.

That is a hard thing to say East of Eden but I agree. As horrific as it was...many lives were saved.

As far as flooding the earth, I'm not at all certain it was the entire world. Was it instead the area in which the fallen angels had created havoc? Their offspring, the giants, were the reason for the flood.

The Bible says that it was the sons of God who came to earth and used it as a brothel.

One would think that God would keep his supernatural entities the hell away from our women when He well knew that they would force Him to don the title of genocidal maniac.

Is that not what any of us would do?

Is God just more stupid than we are?

Regards
DL

Perhaps He didn't give a rat's patootie about the fallen ones. It was instead those that decided to pal around with them that were being proven. They failed. It is a shadow of what will be and is now. Decisions are being made all the time. The flood, of a different nature, will come again.

I just hate to see good adult minds that believe in fantasy characters like angels and demons, talking animals and water walking.

Follow your Bible instructions friend and grow.

1 Corinthians 13:11
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

Regards
DL

I understand your feelings. I hate to see good people unable to accept the spiritual and read without understanding. It is sad when some simply see the letter and not the spirit.

Of course if one read a bit further in the very chapter they quoted in order to chastise someone they would see..in the very next verse....

13:12 For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.

They would also know...if they read the begining of the chapter, just a few verses from their favored quote....that the writer himself knows there are angels.

13:1 Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.

Yep. Angels and demons and talking animals and staffs that turn into snakes and a God that does not mind using genocide as a form of justice.

These are all real yep yep.

1 Corinthians 13:11
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I Am]

It is sad when some simply see the letter and not the spirit.

Like you fail to see the divine inspiration behind the Qur'an?

Yep. Pit one book of myths against the other to determine which one uses more fantasy than the other.

This should be good.

Don't get me wrong, there is wisdom in both but to read either literally is to fall into belief in fantasy.

If either were to be believed would the Vatican have a Christian and Muslim working study group trying to dither out what both books have in common and what the verses are actually trying to tell us?

Regards
DL

[cnorman18]

MODERATOR INTERVENTION



You have already been warned about responding to interventions on the thread and about telling other members to grow up, subtly or not. Sarcasm is also not appropriate ("that's all true, yep yep"). You have been exhibiting some decidedly uncivil behavior of late, and it's been noted. It's not getting better.

The next step after a formal warning is probation. Bear that in mind and clean up your act.

I will do my best but you must recognize the difficulty in being civil with those who applaud the genocide of man.

I may lack the word to be civil with those who are acting in an uncivilized way and are traitors to humanity.

Find a way, and be careful about putting words into other people's mouths. Believing in the literal truth of the Bible may not be to your taste, but you hardly have warrant to accuse people of "applauding genocide" because of it. That's calculated flamebait, and it's not going to be tolerated.

Get better. Now.

ETA:

Don't respond to this publicly. That would be very, very unwise.

[lao tzu]

Don't get me wrong, there is wisdom in both but to read either literally is to fall into belief in fantasy.

Hello GIA,

I've studied both of them, and my impression is that the Qur'an is a cheap knock-off. It was intended as another "book sent down with a prophet," mistakenly assuming the Hebrew sacred texts followed that pattern. Muhammad's lack of familiarity with the religions he was claiming as predecessors betrays him again and again.

The Christian holy trinity, according to Muhammad, was the Father, Son, and Mary. Solomon was a warrior-king. Noah and his flood receive only the most cursory of treatments. The creation tale is almost unrecognizable, borrowing its cosmology from the Greek seven heavens rather than from anything recognizable in Genesis.

The Bible is similarly based on older mythologies, but where the Qur'an tells the biblical stories more shallowly, the Bible actually adds depth to the stories on which it's based. Where the Bible improves on the literary form, the Qur'an creates a pidgin. While Muhammad may have been a better orator than any individual biblical writer, he simply did not have the same access to a religious community against whom he could whet his talents, or the benefit of centuries of give and take as the traditions took form. It makes a profound difference.

As ever, Jesse

[Greatest I Am]

Don't get me wrong, there is wisdom in both but to read either literally is to fall into belief in fantasy.

Hello GIA,

I've studied both of them, and my impression is that the Qur'an is a cheap knock-off. It was intended as another "book sent down with a prophet," mistakenly assuming the Hebrew sacred texts followed that pattern. Muhammad's lack of familiarity with the religions he was claiming as predecessors betrays him again and again.

The Christian holy trinity, according to Muhammad, was the Father, Son, and Mary. Solomon was a warrior-king. Noah and his flood receive only the most cursory of treatments. The creation tale is almost unrecognizable, borrowing its cosmology from the Greek seven heavens rather than from anything recognizable in Genesis.

The Bible is similarly based on older mythologies, but where the Qur'an tells the biblical stories more shallowly, the Bible actually adds depth to the stories on which it's based. Where the Bible improves on the literary form, the Qur'an creates a pidgin. While Muhammad may have been a better orator than any individual biblical writer, he simply did not have the same access to a religious community against whom he could whet his talents, or the benefit of centuries of give and take as the traditions took form. It makes a profound difference.

As ever, Jesse

Informative. thanks for this.

Regards
DL