I recently heard stories of Christians getting all excited over the "discovery" of Noah'sArk on Mount Arafat. Finally they could claim that the flood was real and that Noah and the ark existed and therefore the bible was right.
I went off to research this expecting to find photos of a carefully excavated site with remains of a boat and to my amusement found that this (see link) was what all the fuss was about/
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9gnMiSBNY1EAigBgQ2jzbkF;_ylu=X3oDMTA4NDgyNWN0BHNlYwNwcm9m/SIG=13hd7but6/EXP=1150191361/**http%3a//www.stevequayle.com/Giants/Ancient.Civ_Technol/Pics.Ancient.civ/040426.Noahs.Ark.1.jpg
And to think the creationists mock evolution over lack of evidence yet they get all excited over this grainy sattelite image that could be anything.
2006-06-11 22:43:33 · 10 answers · asked by Cindy 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
No, that's not what all the fuss is about however even among secular scientists many believe that a ark found on the mountain is old enough for Noah's Ark. I can not tell you whether or not that is the same object or not. And lastly, with modern technology there is no such thing as a "grainy sattelite image".
2006-06-11 22:46:56 · answer #1 · answered by Simon 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
This is the same as someone looking to see proof of God. Each of us have a certain expectation of what something should be in order to be convinced it existed. Here's a short tale taken from the writings of Swami Rama of the Himalayas.
After many years of study and meditation, an aspiring student got fed-up and demanded that his yoga master show him God or admit that God does not exist.
The master agreed and the next morning, he asked the very excited aspirant, what is the form in which he wants to see God. The disciple was confused and said that God should appear in his own form, whatever that may be, not according to what the disciple expects to see.
The master smiled and said that if God does not appear in the form the disciple expects, the disciple will not accept that the appearance is that of God. Yet, upon further reflection, the disciple was not able to pin down, what it is that he thinks God should actually look like in order to convince himself.
Faith is something to be understood and experienced within a person and not to be shown or proved by another.
The same should go for Noah's Ark. This is a matter of faith, not satellite pictures, excavation or spending 20 years in a seminary or in a convent or in the Himalayas with a swami. The bigger picture is not whether there was an Ark or whether a piece of wood exists as an evidence. The message of the Bible is the message of God and the story of Noah's Ark is part of the whole message.
2006-06-12 06:22:13 · answer #2 · answered by Son of Gap 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no proof of the Ark because it never existed. There have been many so called "proved" landing sites of the Ark, in many different locations. No one has ever decided on the actual location, nor have any of the supposed locations been proved without blind faith. I believe that there might have been a flood, but it wasn't global, it was the "world" of that time which was the biblical world which we now call the middle east. If any evidence of the Ark exists it's much closer to sea level.
2006-06-12 05:58:05 · answer #3 · answered by ? 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
reminds me of the weapons of mass destruction satellite image, are you sure they didn't just steal that one???
and anyway, a piece of wood on mt. ararat doesn't prove the flood existed. all it proves was that some person brought something made of wood up there. you need more evidence. you need to first date it to make sure its even old enough, you need to be able to say what the wood is from, what kind of pitch is in the wood, from how far away it is, how it was crafted, is there evidence of animals (ie, feces or hairs or something), and could the animals and people get off the damn mountain in the first place.
2006-06-12 05:49:41 · answer #4 · answered by Aleks 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
All I know is that the wood that the ark was made out of after the flood, that wood wasn't around anymore they say, and this art they found is suppose to be of this beaver wood, I think...
2006-06-12 06:58:54 · answer #5 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LoL good point. i guess this is really all they have as of now as evidence but i have heard of different cultures that have never before made contact with one another having similar flood stories/myths that happened to occur around the same time period who also claim to have evidence u might want to look into it or browse around the history channel's website. hope i helped :-)
2006-06-12 05:49:30 · answer #6 · answered by ayleyha 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Thats not recent, its been around for years.
And it could be anything, true. But it could also be the Ark. We may never know, nothing to get all worked up over.
2006-06-12 05:47:42 · answer #7 · answered by sweetie_baby 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
To blindly believe in the bible and close your ears to facts. I have asked many Noah questions and that's what I felt was the best proof to offer.
2006-06-12 05:57:28 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nah there more escited about what some one clamed to have found with simographs and the like.....
But it's just a claim and they can't get in there to prove it becose the local goverment has closed it's boarders.
2006-06-12 05:51:17 · answer #9 · answered by CrazyCat 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
So where is this ark is it what the arrows are pointing to or the re circle?
2006-06-12 05:54:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋