Noah's Ark - Literal or what?

Chadman, if you buy either of the books, you will become a believer.

Another site on the ark:

http://www.anchorstone.com/content/view/181/62/


In 1977 Ron Wyatt took his first trip to eastern Turkey to pursue an interest in ancient history, archaeology and the Bible. Little did he realize that this would be the first of over 100 trips to the Middle East or that he would become the discoverer of some of the most sought after Biblical treasures of all time.

Before he died in 1999, Ron would be credited by many with finding the remains of Noah's Ark, the ashen ruins of Sodom & Gomorrah, the spot where the Red Sea Crossing took place, the real Mt. Sinai (not in Egypt but in Saudi Arabia), the location of the crucifixion site of Jesus Christ and the hiding place of the Ark of the Covenant.

The Anchor Stone web site was one of the first established (April 1997) to feature these Discoveries. It is the oldest remaining web site that contains virtually all of the material and newsletters he released during his lifetime. From the beginning it was started with Ron's full approval and cooperation. We believe it contains the best and most accurate information on his work. Ron said in one of the last talks he gave before he died, "Now, if you haven't figured out by now that this isn't Ron Wyatt's 'stuff', I'll make it real clear to you that this is GOD's 'stuff'!!!....These things are ours to use, folks." It is our desire here at Anchor Stone International to continue that same spirit, "This is God's stuff and it's ours to use."

We believe that these discoveries prove the Bible to be true and that it can be trusted. When God says something happened in the past and we find evidence that it did, it strengthens our faith and gives us hope for the things that He says will happen in the future. Before God intervenes in history again with the greastest event of all, the second coming of Jesus, he will give every one in the world the opportunity to know the truth. These discoveries are not to be worshipped but are to be used to lead people to our Creator and Redeemer. They are to be used to make us rejoice and praise God more and to be a testimony for God to the world.

We are convinced that the discoveries that we are sharing with you and the world have been miraculously preserved and will play a big part in preparing the world for God's final intervention. They are having a major impact on many people's lives bringing about revival and reformation. Each of the discoveries was a unique event in history and prophetically, each discovery is linked to the return of Jesus Christ to this world.

The fact that these discoveries have all been made recently can be considered a sign that time is running out. It's a final call to planet earth.

Friend, let's answer that call, what do you say? If not now, when?

In His service,
Anchor Stone International Board

 

1 Cor. 1:27-28
"But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things - and the things that are not - to nullify the things that are."

Thanks for the compliment Chad, Ron Wyatt and me are the foolish ones Paul was referring to.

 

Chad -

Something else to consider - you said "don't ignore what we know" well - Science "knew" the world was flat, that "there was nothing invisible that caused disease to spread from man to another," that "when man first walked in Mexico," that "traveling faster than the speed of sound was impossible," and "bumble bees can't fly."

When I was young they "knew" that "newborns can't see".

They also "knew" the the chemo they gave my mother would cure her. Except - it turned out her cancer was estrogen fed and their chemo was estrogen based. *OOPS*

They "knew" that Paxil was going to help depressed people all over the world. Except - they've noticed a significant rise in suicides of those using it. *OOPS*

They "knew" my grandfather had six months or less to live - thankfully - God didn't agree. He lived about six years after that.

They "knew" that I was dieing and would lose my face to cancer. Thankfully - God didn't agree.

They "knew" my best friend was going to be dead three years ago. I got an email from her a few minutes ago.

Science - in the end - really KNOWS every little, Chad.

And - if we assume science DOES know - we'll stop learning because the greatest scientists are the ones who questioned what "was known."

[ July 12, 2005, 04:52 PM: Message edited by: TexasSky ]

 

Well that much of what you said is true at least.

Question: Should Eve have "Believed" what she was being "shown" by the serpent? The serpent was providing imperical 'data' to support his claims. Should he have been "believed"?

OR was the data "flawed"? Was the experiment "flawed" in a way that Eve was not trained/educated/informed enough to detect?

If so - would there ever in all of time be a point where she would be informed enough - to adequately 'detect' the flaw in the experiment that the serpent was doing?

And that much is true as well.

But in this case the abuse of science by atheists (and then creation of junk-science "stories" to counter the Bible) is not a case of SCIENCE vs religion - it is a case of TWO RELIGIONs BOTH appealing to science. ONE turns science into JUNK SCIENCE to overblow its own claims while the other has no incentive at all to go "Beyond" current science. It matters not to a Christian "Believer" that science has "questions" that are still unnanswered.

But that is a HUGE problem for evolutionists that "need" to spin stories "As if they are fact" -- take the horse series for example.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Whether or not they found the ark "yet" does not have any bearing on what the Bible actually SAYS (unless they are going to rewrite the Bible after they find the Ark). The Bible already tells us about the fact of God's dealing with mankind 4400+ years ago.

The evolutionist lives in a dream world where "exegesis" does not actually exist. So no need to simply "read the Bible" and SEE what it says. In their world the Bible is up for contual editing so as to fit the current speculations of atheists trying to discount the Bible record of God's dealing with mankind.

But the question is actually directed at Christians - Bible Believing Christians who ARE inclined to actually READING the text and applying ACTUAL methods of exegesis to it.

If by "science" you mean "factual" then NO MIRACLE (not even the birth of Christ OR His resurrection OR His ascension into heaven) is "science FACT". And certainly SCIENCE knows NOTHING about the nature of sin, the sinful nature the fall of man or the NEED of a new birth!!

None of those FACTS are available to SCIENCE. JUST as SCIENCE has no ability at all to CREATE a living planet OR to flood one or to SEE the flood of one and monitor its "process" at a "planetary level".

What science CAN do is observe much smaller LOCAL floods and then "SPECULATE".

But without the ability to "reproduce the experiement" at a global level - ... the "speculation" is about a process that is not "reproducable".

As Collin Patterson noted - even evolutionism itself is not REPRODUCABLE (though it certainly SHOULD be given artificial means in the lab).

In Christ,

Bob

 

I did always think that I heard finding Noah's Ark was a hoax as it was never verified.

What literal verses say the earth is flat?

 

chadman,

bmerr here. Much has been said already concerning Ron Wyatt and others. If nothing else, his is an interesting site. Ther are many others similar to his. If his discoveries were legitimate, the world would not neccessarily be overjoyed to know about it.

He would not be the first person to be ridiculed and rejected for giving a good report. I couldn't say whether he's found anything or not, but I'd admit that he appears to have found several things that look like what he claims they are.

We must be careful (in many areas) to not just "follow the crowd" in judging the veracity of matters. Biblically speaking, the majority is almost always wrong.

Some other Biblical references to Noah are Isaiah 54:9; Ezekiel 14:14, 20; Luke 3:36, 17:27, 27; Matthew 24:37, 38; Hebrews 11:7; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5.

I'd say if he was real enough for Jesus and His inspired writers to refer to him, he was real enough for me.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

Ge 10:25
And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother's name was Joktan.

Some folks (myself included) believe this is a reference to when the continenets seperated. This would explain how the animals scattered after the ark landed. There once was one huge land mass, then it seperated "in the days of Peleg."

FWIW

BTW; It doesn't bother me a bit that this is a casual "aside" in the narrative of Scripture. After all, if you consider the immensity of the "heavens" and the multitudes of stars in them, Genesis simply says;
Ge 1:16
And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.

As if to say "BTW God made the stars too."

Why would it be so difficult if He also said, "BTW, this is when the land masses seperated."

In HIS service;
Jim

 

bmerr here. I don't think a "Pangea"-type land mass is required, even. If the water level in the oceans were dropped a hundred feet or so, all the continents would be connected anyway.

There's a guy named Kent Hovind (a Baptist) that has what he calls the "Hovind Theory" concerning the flood, and the surrounding events. Though I can't agree with his theology, he presents a reasonable theory concerning the flood, the scattering of species, etc.

Might be worth a look.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

Pangea is useful in extrapolating back from the drift of contentents today and seeing how they "fit back together" --

So it is not just a case of "trying to account for animal dispersion". It is also a case for seeing geologic dynamics as well as the "match" between contentents when you put them together.

Certainly we see island chains forming over time with plate dynamics. If it rains today - no need to doubt that it rained at the flood only more so. If the plates and continents are moving today no need to doubt that they moved around the time of the flood - only more so.

As for God creating the stars WHEN He created the TWO great lights. I think He only created TWO lights on day 4 -- the stars He had already created.

IMHO.

In Christ,

Bob

 

OK - a calmer response then.

I was responding to a point you were not making - but one that has been made here in the past by those trying to "get out of" the way the Bible's view of origins contradicts a more humanist version (as "if" humanism IS Science but the Bible has no actual science fact).

The truth is "science" would be interested in knowing about a literal 7 day "origins" period vs billions of years "trying to get life jumpstarted". Those two entirely different views for origins would have entirely different science "facts" expected. (Or at least they would expect to find some very specific science fact pointing in their direction).

Obviously God does not spell out the 'way' in which His "spoken Word" is able to transform matter, energy, space and time. He simply points to the end product giving both the "What" and the "When" without showing "How" His Word is able to do that.

In Christ,

Bob

 

That is the "easy version".

Is that a new kind of "exegesis"??

How about addressing the question posed at the top?

That has never been the problem.

Rather the problem has been much more blatant and is perfectly illustrated by the myths and blunders of evolutionists in the case of the horse series. It is a case of science bent to the usages of humanists seeking a non-god answer for origins.

Having said that - I have no burden to suggest that the ark has been found.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Chad,

Be careful please. You discounted my comparison of miracles by saying that we don't have evidence that refutes the resurrection. Technially speaking, from a scientific perspective, Science has as much evidence against the resurrection as they do against any other biblical miracle. People die ever day around the world, and none that are dead for three days are resurrected. Science, even today, would tell you that you can't be dead for three days and come back to life. Science today would and does, dismiss Christ because He doesn't fit their belief system.

Do you believe the burning bush? Remember that? It burned, but it wasn't consumed? That pretty much violates any scientific evidence, but I believe it is true.

I posted several links to various sites supporting the belief that the Ark was found. I saw a Discovery Channel show recently that says they have those Chariot Wheels that you say Wyatt didn't find. Your evidence against the Ark of the Covenent is "probably" and "they would have," - in other words, your evidence against Wyatt is "theory" not fact. Yet, you cling to it like it was fact.

As some one else pointed out - the evidence that we DO have about the Bible SUPPORTS it. Why shouldn't we trust it?

Most of my life there were rumors that Nazareth wasn't real. Then they discovered a city marker, on a fishing village, right where they expected biblical Nazareth to be.

For decades the nay-sayers used to hit me with, "How can you be so intelligent and believe the bible? The thing wasn't even written until several hundred years after it supposedly happened." Then they learned that some of the manuscripts for the bible are dated in the first century AD.

I grew up being told that there was no way the red-sea could have parted. Then when I was in high school they went, "Oh my gosh. There was a comet that passed so close to earth that its tail would have disrupted the seas, and may very well have caused the parting of the red sea." Did Science say, "Yes! Proof of the accuracy of God's word?" Of course not. They said, "Well, yeah, it probably happened, but its not a miracle. Its "just" a comet." Excuse? JUST a comet at JUST the right moment is NOT a miracle?

If you put your faith in Science, above your faith in God, you'll be terribly disappointed. Faith in God REQUIRES faith in God's word. The two go hand in hand.

As Dr. Ralph Smith used to say, "How can you accept the virgin birth, the death and resurrection of Christ, the conversion of Paul on the road to Damascus, and NOT accept the other miracles of the bible? How can you pick and choose what part of the bible to believe and really believe any of it?"