The story of Noah's Ark is one of the most famous stories from the Old Testament of the Bible. It is an almost unbelievable tale of a massive flood covering the Earth and a boat built by a man named Noah in which he would sail with two of every living animal on board. When the Biblical flood waters subsided, the ark came to rest upon a mountain top.
"... and on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat." -- Genesis 8:4
One problem that has always faced Bible literalists is the lack of an existing ark. The mountains of Ararat mentioned in the Genesis account are often thought to be Mount Ararat in present-day Turkey; doubters of the Biblical account believe the nonexistence of an ark at the site points to the fabrication of the beloved story.
Yet one group of Chinese explorers has claimed to have found not only petrified wood but what they believe to be an actual ark -- the same one mentioned in the Biblical account -- on the slopes of Mount Ararat.
According to the Christian Science Monitor (CSM), "Noah's Ark Ministries International (NAMI) held a press conference April 25 in Hong Kong to present their findings and say they were '99.9 percent sure' that a wooden structure found at a 12,000-ft. elevation and dated as 4,800 years old was Noah’s Ark."
Over the last over five years,
NAMI has studied and excavated the site, located at an elevation of over 4,000m. The group has found petrified wood samples and a buried wooden structure in the side of Mount Ararat. As one team member told the CSM, it couldn't be anything else:
The only record of a wooden structure on Mount Ararat is Noah’s Ark," Clara Wei, the team coordinator, also said today by telephone from Beijing. "So up to now I believe this is the most probable explanation. We don’t have another explanation.Not so fast, retorts former team member Dr. Randall Price, who
recently told the CSM he has "difficulties with a number of issues related to the evidence at hand." These issues, which Dr. Price wouldn't discuss in interview but were contained in a leaked email obtained by the CMS, include his suspicion that locals planted the wood beams.
Whether the actual vessel has been discovered will likely never be fully answered. Some will claim this find a victory for the Bible; others will see it as another hoax, another attempt to supplement an old story with impossibly preserved physical evidence. How do you see it?
Do you think it's possible that Noah's Ark could be found? Do you think it would be preserved? Does it need to still be in existence for the story to be true?
True
Comments (28)
God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. To me it doesn't matter if it is the ark or not. His truth stands throughout time. Athough I am interested just cause I love history.
Whether the Ark is still around or not doesn't matter to me. I don't need an old relic of a boat to prove to me that God's Word is trustworthy.
If there was very strong evidence that they had found the Ark and it was very trustworthy people would still find a way to deny it though. People will deny anything if it means they have an excuse to deny Christ and the consequences of Him being God.
For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth. For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse. For although they knew God, they did not honor him as God or give thanks to him, but they became futile in their thinking, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Claiming to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things. Therefore God gave them up in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, to the dishonoring of their bodies among themselves, because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen.
(Romans 1:18-25)
I can't still get over that people think the story of Noah's Ark really happened.
Pretty much every source I've read has discredited the search team. In my short 19 years I can remember the ark being "discovered" at least one other time, and that was false. As one person said "Every team that has ever gone searching for the ark has found it" (think I read it on CNN).
And it does seem as though a team of Christians looking for the ark would find it--when scientists expect a certain answer or, even worse, need a certain answer for validation, they tend to get that answer. It's not as though there aren't other archeologists whoa re interested in this--if it's true it will be peer reviewed and published. Until then I really wouldn't take this seriously at all.
That said, the lack of an ark does not disprove the story as being literally true. After the flood the wood from the ark would have been perfect for building new shelter and probably would have been dismantled as such.
Of course that said, there is no legitimate science to suggest that the flood ever happened. Who knows if the story is true or not (I lean towards not true). As usual, we're all clueless. I'm sure that this story, regardless of its scientific validity, will be used to justify belief by many Christians. I'm also sure that some scientists will use this un-scientific "evidence" to suggest that Christianity is illogical and practiced by the ignorant. Both groups would be wrong to use this story in such a way.
The only record of a wooden structure on Mount Ararat is Noah’s
Ark.
This is about as sane as finding a piece of a house in the middle of the ocean and then saying "the only record of civilization in the middle of the ocean is Atlantis, so we're are 99.9% sure that we've almost found it!"
This whole thing is such a huge crock of idiotic bullcrap, and there's absolutely no science behind it. Just because you found some wood on a mountain, that doesn't mean you've found an ancient boat... It means you've found some wood on a mountain. There's no telling how it ended up there or what it's from, there are literally a plethora of different possibilities... but to assume that it absolutely is the ark and rule out all other possibilities is just plain stupid and un-scientific.
Do some actual science, and examine the evidence first, before coming to a conclusion (instead of the other way around), and then maybe we'll talk.
Even if all of these Bible stories are historically accurate, that doesn't mean any of the theological implications of them are. It's important to recognize that the Bible was NOT written from an objective point of view.
If there were a giant flood at the time Noah is posited, it would be evident in the geological record. And that's not even going into the plain ridiculousness of the story.
I'm with @Pcgecko85@xanga - it's plain "lol" that people believe in a literal noah's ark.
this is totalyy plausible. but even if its not the real ark, thats fine
It doesn't matter if it's real or not. Faith is more important than scientific evidence.
Yeah, it is true. I believe. In fact there is much, much more that there is to believe.
If you look at other myths of variety of cultures talk about a flood over the world. No this is not historical documentation or science... but often myths contain a thread of truth to them. Here is just one site I found http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html
if it indeed is the ark... it would make for one interesting deal that atheists and anti-Christian scholars would have to reconcile because only one story of an ark being grounded on a mountain comes to mind and it's found in the Old Testament or the Jewish Scriptures which in turn speaks about the veracity of the claims that there is a God. While for me, i'm skeptical due to the hay and straw on the ground... if this is indeed true and such... it only verifies the Bible to be accurate and thus calls into question many other beliefs out there to be valid... and whether these beliefs should even be followed because then it comes to question what is myth and what is historic fact...
but i'm still skeptical
I certainly think that its possible. But, it honestly doesn't matter, because anyone who does not want to believe will find a reason not to believe. So, if the idea is to use science to validate the Bible in this way, its just not going to work for the vast majority. However, I think it would be mondo cool if this turned out to actually be Noah's ark.
And, lol. The locals planted the wood there? They just happened to have that much petrified wood from 4800 years ago? Sure. That sounds a bit like reaching to me.
I hope they don't use carbon-14 dating for it, since we all know how unreliable that is.
Gee, the obviously very objective and highly scientific team at "Noah's Ark Ministries International" are SUPER POSITIVE that they've found this thing that they named their entire group after because they're so obsessed with it.
Now there's some research worth trusting.
It could be any other dozen of ships from mythology that survived a flood. If people are obtuse enough to think that it proves Biblical history-which most have enough common sense not to-then the same piece of evidence can be used to prove any other number of religions.
@Faerie_In_Combat_Boots@xanga - Actually, they used carbon dating for it, and they said the timeline carbon dating gave them matches when they believe it happened in the Bible. Of course, my first thought when reading that was, "Oh, so now they say carbon dating is reliable?" It fairly amusing to me.
You can never prove the Bible stories, because people will always be able to come up with alternate theories. For example, that ark they found could be a relic from the end of the most recent ice age, which would have flooded the world. Actually, science tells us you can't prove anything anyway, that you can only disprove theories. But having a large amount of evidence in your favor is very helpful to a theory being accepted (at least by the scientific community). But it doesn't look to me like they have a large enough amount of evidence to cast away doubt.
@Liquid_Pain_523@xanga - Aaah, that's hilarious. Thanks for replying.
I'm just throwing this out there...Noah's ark was made of wood. Wood decays over time. Why are we expecting to find it? I suppose it's possible the entire thing got petrified, but we have no reason to suppose it did.
My question isn't so much "is this true," so much as "why on earth are people still searching for this thing?" What does it show if they do or don't find it? Really. Personally, I take Genesis 1-11 to be metaphorical, so looking for Noah's Ark would be like looking for the Inn the Good Samaritan visited (which, sadly, they've made a tourist attraction called the Good Samaritan Inn).
@kamrandolph@xanga - i fully agree. it is not the wreck of the ark that counts, but the real meaning of God's re-starting of a new era that does.
Doesn't proof negate faith?
Despite the implausibility of preservation (as others have noted), how do we know that THIS would be the ark from Noah and not some other vessel? Did he leave a signed note on board? Perhaps a picture of the crew and animals? Dating of Bible events are suspect due to the lack of persistent chronology; the time may be much longer than what used to be generally accepted because interpretation of things such as geneology are elusive. Mildly interesting, but not much more than that.
@Lakakalo@xanga - No, proof does not 'negate' faith. Proof simply supports it. For example, I believe Jesus rose from the dead ----- that's faith. Thousands of people and His own closest followers, not to mentions detractors, actually saw Him alive after being killed ----- that's proof.
@Soul_Pizza@xanga - @Pcgecko85@xanga - Agreed.
All they've found it wood on a mountain. They say the only record of a wooden structure in that area is Noah's Ark. So what? That's not proof anything except that they found some wood and a book written by man said it happened.
if evidence still exists after a couple thousand years, maybe...