Man 99.9% Sure He Found Noah's Ark

As I said in my earlier post, there are numerous traditions that have a flood myth..even some that pre-date Noah's....so, if this is proven to be the vessel mentioned in those myths(which I find it hard to believe anyone can "prove" that), many traditions will find their beliefs validated.

But it is still a matter of faith.

How many of those traditions had their ark ending up on top of Mt. Ararat?
 
link

much like the abominable snowman, sasquatch, nessie, the yeti, chupacabra, predictions of the end times, auburn's football history, etc. the "discovery" of the ark has been a recurring phenomenon.
 
link

much like the abominable snowman, sasquatch, nessie, the yeti, chupacabra, predictions of the end times, auburn's football history, etc. the "discovery" of the ark has been a recurring phenomenon.

Yup. As I said in an earlier post, Ark findings have become a cottage industry with these folks.

Like their "creation science" brethren, they already have their conclusion. They just set out to "prove" it.

Also, see the Latter Day Saints archeologists, who keep trying to find remnants of Semitic tribes in pre-Columbian archeological digs.
 
Yup. As I said in an earlier post, Ark findings have become a cottage industry with these folks.

Like their "creation science" brethren, they already have their conclusion. They just set out to "prove" it.

Also, see the Latter Day Saints archeologists, who keep trying to find remnants of Semitic tribes in pre-Columbian archeological digs.

the selling of snake oil falls only slightly behind prostitution as the "oldest profession"
 
not saying you are wrong, i just see it a different way. just as i think that grace transcends our abilities to communicate, i find that also applies to my ability to understand and comprehend. i don't like to apply my understanding of "logic" to "faith". it sounds silly even when i type it, but i find that they can co-exist without too much worry. when i try to apply my "understanding" and "logic" to my "faith" i find too many rabbit holes and a tendency to make too many things want to fit in places of my own making (and i see this as a continual problem with mankind and not just me). i am at a place where i find comfort, some inspiration and hopefully not too much complacency.

I'm assuming that you get the concept of God's grace from the Bible. If so, the Bible says that there are many things that we can know. Three things of great interest that are explicitely stated that we can know: we can know God and understand Him; we can know the love of God; we can know that we have eternal life.

As far as faith and logic, Biblical faith is based on logic.
 
I'm assuming that you get the concept of God's grace from the Bible. If so, the Bible says that there are many things that we can know. Three things of great interest that are explicitely stated that we can know: we can know God and understand Him; we can know the love of God; we can know that we have eternal life.

As far as faith and logic, Biblical faith is based on logic.

thanks for the thoughtful response BiB. I think there are many ways to approach the "understanding" of God and Jesus and although i don't subscribe to "literal meaning" in the Bible, i do believe that it provides a very capable guide in those approaches.
 
As I said in my earlier post, there are numerous traditions that have a flood myth..even some that pre-date Noah's....so, if this is proven to be the vessel mentioned in those myths(which I find it hard to believe anyone can "prove" that), many traditions will find their beliefs validated.

We agree and I provided a couple of examples. There are multitudes more. These variations are an evidence of the reality of a flood. So they are not myths but corruptions of the true.

even some that pre-date Noah's

There are none that pre-date Noah's - he wrote the original account. He and his family were the only ones who survived it.

But it is still a matter of faith.

Agreed - we must take Noah's word for it. We weren't there, nor is there any video that records the event. But there is a great deal of evidence: as we've both noted, the ubiqutous flood accounts; many geological evidences such as the massive sedimentary rock formations around the earth, in some cases 500,000 sq miles like here in the U.S; etc. But these aren't proofs, just evidences. So, it is still a matter of faith.
 
not saying you are wrong, i just see it a different way. just as i think that grace transcends our abilities to communicate, i find that also applies to my ability to understand and comprehend. i don't like to apply my understanding of "logic" to "faith". it sounds silly even when i type it, but i find that they can co-exist without too much worry. when i try to apply my "understanding" and "logic" to my "faith" i find too many rabbit holes and a tendency to make too many things want to fit in places of my own making (and i see this as a continual problem with mankind and not just me). i am at a place where i find comfort, some inspiration and hopefully not too much complacency.

See hoodrat, we actually share some common ground. Or rabbit holes.
 
Yup. As I said in an earlier post, Ark findings have become a cottage industry with these folks.
May be true with some, I don't keep up with it. My guess is that some are also genuine in their pursuit. Also, I would be very surprised if there is any recognizable remnant of the Noah's ark left but would not be moved if they did find it.

Like their "creation science" brethren, they already have their conclusion. They just set out to "prove" it.

Though I don't keep up with their doings, I subscribe to the "creation science" conclusion. I also, agree that they, and I for that matter, have a conclusion, and set out to prove it.

I also know that evolutionists have their own conclusion, however less precise, that they set out to prove.
 
huh??? you do know that there are other cultures out there with extremely ancient flood myths, correct?

Yes I do. As I've stated earlier in the thread, the existence of the multitude of "flood accounts" with some common threads, is an evidence of the reality of the event.

But to your point, Noah went through the flood and wrote the account preserved in the Bible. This account, or an already altered version, accompanied the various families who dispersed some time after the flood. Their versions became corrupted or more corrupted over time.
 
I also know that evolutionists have their own conclusion, however less precise, that they set out to prove.

That is the very antithesis of science.

Which is why "creation science" is a contradiction in terms.
 
maybe the Flood happened, maybe not. I've not read a 'Bible' that predates King James' version, so I don't know what all he cut out, left in or added.
 

New Posts

Advertisement

Trending content

Advertisement

Latest threads