Noah and the Ark - Fact or Fiction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter maria_rose
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
M

maria_rose

Guest
I’m currently involved in a Bible Study on Genesis. We read the story of Noah, the Ark and the Flood.
Does anyone here have any links or book suggestions on finding out more of the historical authenticity of this event. According to tradition and scripture ,the Ark is resting on Mount Ararat(in modern Turkey).
I remember reading something about that a long time ago.
Anyone have any leads on this?
Is the story symbolic as well or a real historical event as I believe?
 
Not sure, but if you investigate other cultures, most have stories about a major flood.
 
These articles from the New Advent Catholic Supersite Catholic Encyclopedia may be a good place to start:
newadvent.org/cathen/11088a.htm
newadvent.org/cathen/01720a.htm

Regarding:
Not sure, but if you investigate other cultures, most have stories about a major flood.
Click to expand...
…the New Advent Article comments:
Because of the striking resemblances between the two [stories]many maintain that the Biblical account is derived from the Babylonian. But the differences are so many and so important that this view must be pronounced untenable. The Scriptural story is a parallel and independent form of a common tradition.
Click to expand...
 
maria_rose said:
I’m currently involved in a Bible Study on Genesis. We read the story of Noah, the Ark and the Flood.
Does anyone here have any links or book suggestions on finding out more of the historical authenticity of this event. According to tradition and scripture ,the Ark is resting on Mount Ararat(in modern Turkey).
I remember reading something about that a long time ago.
Anyone have any leads on this?
Is the story symbolic as well or a real historical event as I believe?
Click to expand...
I believe it is a real historical event…

I also think and have faith that it’s probally going to be confirmed during my lifetime…

this was the latest major development in the search on Ararat for the most famous boat ever built:
meta-religion.com/Archaeology/Mesopotamia/mt_ararat_anomaly.htm

Take that with a grain of salt, but I looked at that photo and my jaw dropped.

the CIA discovered this “anomoly” in 1949 by pure accident when they were spying on Russia…
artbulla.com/zion/Noah.html
 
maria_rose said:
I’m currently involved in a Bible Study on Genesis. We read the story of Noah, the Ark and the Flood.
Does anyone here have any links or book suggestions on finding out more of the historical authenticity of this event. According to tradition and scripture ,the Ark is resting on Mount Ararat(in modern Turkey).
I remember reading something about that a long time ago.
Anyone have any leads on this?
Is the story symbolic as well or a real historical event as I believe?
Click to expand...
The Bible states that the ark is resting in the mountains of ararat.does not specifically state that it is mount ararat itself.

see this:

From the NIT Bible:

Genesis 8:4

And on the seventeeth day of the seventh month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.

That passage is also the same as the one in the Bible placed by the Gideons.

So the Bible itself does not state that the ark is resting on mount ararat. only that it is resting in the mountains of ararat.
 
maria_rose said:
I’m currently involved in a Bible Study on Genesis. We read the story of Noah, the Ark and the Flood.
Does anyone here have any links or book suggestions on finding out more of the historical authenticity of this event. According to tradition and scripture ,the Ark is resting on Mount Ararat(in modern Turkey).
I remember reading something about that a long time ago.
Anyone have any leads on this?
Is the story symbolic as well or a real historical event as I believe?
Click to expand...
There is no evidence supporting a global flood. No geology, no archeology. Had the flood been a real event, there would be an enormous amount of evidence that would be impossible to not see. But there is none.

The story of the flood is symbolic.

Peace

Tim
 
Orogeny said:
There is no evidence supporting a global flood. No geology, no archeology. Had the flood been a real event, there would be an enormous amount of evidence that would be impossible to not see. But there is none.

The story of the flood is symbolic.

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
So a huge boat resting on top of a mountain isn’t evidence? Fish fossils found on mountains aren’t evidence? :confused: What kind of evidence do you need?
 
Orogeny said:
**There isn’t one, so no, it isn’t.**No, they aren’t.How about continuous worldwide flood deposits? How about a massive amount of archeological evidence?

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
see my posts… There’s something there dammit and the CIA knew about it…

If anything this weird boat like formation may in fact explain how the story came to be, and how Explorers like Marco Polo and historian Josephus, and the monks who lived on the west side of the mountain until the 18th century claimed to know the ark was still there specifically on the south-western side of the mountain, that became unaccessable by foot when there was an avalanche because of a Quake(that also wiped out the monestry).
 
Orogeny said:
I saw your posts. That is a rock formation, not a boat.

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
I agree with you. Some people want to believe and they see a boat in almost anything they see from afar! There is absolutely no evidence of a boat on Mount Ararat.
 
thistle said:
I agree with you. Some people want to believe and they see a boat in almost anything they see from afar! There is absolutely no evidence of a boat on Mount Ararat.
Click to expand...
Excuse me but since when did “Eyewitness Account” dating back to Josephus not be at least evidence that something boat like(yes it could be a weird rock formation, but they all said it was Noah’s Ark and some of these witnesses that went there when it was accessable, including the monks who lived in the monestry on the mountain, claimed to have walked on “the Hull”) was at least once, up there?

This area was suspected well before that 2003 satellite photo was taken, based upon the traditions of where the Ark was spotted/located by the many historical eyewitnesses, and also because the original photos of the anomoly’s side(without seeing it’s top) were taken way back in '47.
 
colliric said:
Excuse me but since when did “Eyewitness Account” dating back to Josephus not be at least evidence that something boat like(yes it could be a weird rock formation, but they all said it was Noah’s Ark and some of these witnesses that went there when it was accessable, including the monks who lived in the monestry on the mountain, claimed to have walked on “the Hull”) was at least once, up there?
Click to expand...
All the “eyewitnesses” and all the expeditions to the “Ark” have yet to produce anything that any reasonable person would agree is evidence of a man-made structure on that mountain. That is a rock formation, not a boat.
This area was suspected well before that 2003 satellite photo was taken, based upon the traditions of where the Ark was spotted/located by the many historical eyewitnesses, and also because the original photos of the anomoly’s side(without seeing it’s top) were taken way back in '47.
Click to expand...
Well, the area has what some call an anomaly. The concept that it could be there both in 1947 and 2003 is not unreasonable. However, I reject the idea that it is an anomaly because rock formations are not anomalies on mountains and that photo is of a rock formation.

Peace

Tim
 
Orogeny said:
All the “eyewitnesses” and all the expeditions to the “Ark” have yet to produce anything that any reasonable person would agree is evidence of a man-made structure on that mountain. That is a rock formation, not a boat.Well, the area has what some call an anomaly. The concept that it could be there both in 1947 and 2003 is not unreasonable. However, I reject the idea that it is an anomaly because rock formations are not anomalies on mountains and that photo is of a rock formation.

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
You think it is a photo of a rock formation… it has not been confirmed to be that scientifically. Experts have analyzed it over and over and there is no major concensus over it and they all agreed it’s a very oddly shaped Rock formation, if it even is one because it’s very very diffrent and is generally thought not to be made of the same substance as the surrounding rock.

Also you seem to have missed the significance of what I said. in 1947 they didn’t have that stunning birds eye sattellite photo and still noticed how oddly boat-like that formation looked simply by having a photo of it’s side taken from a very long distance away by a spy plane accidently having been turned on too early. Then it was kept classified for 48 more years…

There was also more photo’s taken by the CIA in 1972 which they haven’t released yet. They clearly thought it looked very very interesting too…

Also Josephus is the same historian we all tend to rely on for external corroborating evidence when someone asks “did jesus exist”, I also happen to trust him on Noah’s Ark…
 
colliric said:
You think it is a photo of a rock formation… it has not been confirmed to be that scientifically.
Click to expand...
Excuse me, but the burden of proof is on those that claim it is something other than a rock formation because rocks are found on mountains on a fairly regular basis but old, wooden arks aren’t. Any claim that it is not a rock formation requires that those that make the claim confirm scientifically that it is not rock.
Experts have analyzed it over and over and there is no major concensus over it and they all agreed it’s a very oddly shaped Rock formation, if it even is one because it’s very very diffrent and is generally thought not to be made of the same substance as the surrounding rock.
Click to expand...
Ararat is a volcano that is pretty heavily glaciated. That situation leads to unusual shapes. Regardless, the object in the photo doesn’t even look like a boat or wood.
Also you seem to have missed the significance of what I said. in 1947 they didn’t have that stunning birds eye sattellite photo and still noticed how oddly boat-like that formation looked simply by having a photo of it’s side taken from a very long distance away by a spy plane accidently having been turned on too early. Then it was kept classified for 48 more years…

There was also more photo’s taken by the CIA in 1972 which they haven’t released yet.
Click to expand...
There is no significance to that. There used to be a formation in Maine here in the US that looked just like a human face. It was called, I believe, “The Old Man of the Mountain”. http://www.nhpr.org/images/stories/last_oldman_02.jpg

Would you say that there really was a man in there? Sorry, but there wasn’t. It was just a rock formation, just like the object in those photos from Ararat.

Peace

Tim
 
So what difference does it make theologically whether it is fact, fiction, or even some of both? Whether it is fact or fiction does not change what it teaches about mankind’s relationship to God. Does it?:confused:
 
rwoehmke said:
So what difference does it make theologically whether it is fact, fiction, or even some of both? Whether it is fact or fiction does not change what it teaches about mankind’s relationship to God. Does it?:confused:
Click to expand...
Not in my mind it doesn’t.

Peace

Tim
 
Orogeny said:
All the “eyewitnesses” and all the expeditions to the “Ark” have yet to produce anything that any reasonable person would agree is evidence of a man-made structure on that mountain. That is a rock formation, not a boat.Well, the area has what some call an anomaly. The concept that it could be there both in 1947 and 2003 is not unreasonable. However, I reject the idea that it is an anomaly because rock formations are not anomalies on mountains and that photo is of a rock formation.

Peace

Tim
Click to expand...
Not to mention the anomaly is less than a few hundred meters from where Fernand Navarra famously found six peices of 5,000 year old fossilized wood in 1955(Without even knowing how close he was to the anomoly, which was then classified information)…
 
rwoehmke said:
So what difference does it make theologically whether it is fact, fiction, or even some of both? Whether it is fact or fiction does not change what it teaches about mankind’s relationship to God. Does it?:confused:
Click to expand...
nope, but it’s nice to know that it’s fact as opposed to fiction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top