Noah's Ark

David Rohl writes in his book Legend: The Genesis of Civilization


According to Genesis 8:4, the ark eventually landed 'on the mountains of Ararat'-not Mount Ararat, as many Christians interpret the passage. The mountain of the ark is not Mount Aregats or Agri Dagh (as Ararat is Locally known), located to the north-east of Lake Van, but somewhere quite different and much nearer to the Mesopotamian plain. As a result, all the recent explorations by Christian explorers have been heading off in the wrong location!

He writes the the resting place of the Ark was still well known at beginning of the first millennium AD confirmed by Jewish historian Josephus. In his works 'The Antiquities of the Jews' Josephus states that the sacred mountain was well known from the writings of various scholars of that time.

The first modern Christian pilgrim to go in search of the ark was Saint Jacob of Nisibis, who made a pilgrimage to 'the district Gartouk' (a variant spelling of Cardukchi?) which David Young identifies with the district of Karcaik located between the Tigris and Lake Van. With all the evidence pointing away from a location for the lost ark far to the north beyond Lake Van, Young is forced to the conclusion, he was forced to the conclusion that Mount Ararat/Aregats was not the same Ararat referred to in early Christian tradition.

In fact the first time we hear of Mount Ararat being associated with the ark is by Vincent De Beauvais who suggested that that the mountain of the ark was located bear the Araxes river.

This was then taken up by other such travelers such as Friar William of Rubruck, Odoric and Marco Polo. All the early writings state exactly where it is. The peak of Judi Dagh, bordering upon Mesopotamian lowlands in the region later known as Assyria is, in fact, the original traditional site of the ark's landing as stated by numerous early authorities.

Please only people that know something about this. No god creation stuff

Originally posted by Quiintus
Please only people that know something about this.

I know that the story of Noahs Ark is absolutely impossible.
It is not possible scientifically - or genetically - to have happened.

There WAS a big flood. There were survivors. But there was no 'one big boat' that held a family of 6 reproductive humans and a bunch of animals.

If kangaroos and penguins lived on or near Mt. Ararat we could talk.
Otherwise - it's just a myth. A myth based upon the Summerian legends.

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Quiintus
Please only people that know something about this.

I know that the story of Noahs Ark is absolutely impossible.
It is not possible scientifically - or genetically - to have happened.

There WAS a big flood. There were survivors. But there was no 'one big boat' that held a family of 6 reproductive humans and a bunch of animals.

If kangaroos and penguins lived on or near Mt. Ararat we could talk.
Otherwise - it's just a myth. A myth based upon the Summerian legends.

It is a Myth indeed. Maybe perhaps you want to look up the origins of the word Myth. And I'll give you a hint, you probably won't find it online and it has to do with it being history from a certain peoples point of view. So you might want to revise what you have said..

People like David Rohl are leading the way in their respective fields. They don't shun the evidence, as you clearly have. If large parts of what they have talked about in the bible have been proven true, then why can't you fathom that this might also be true.

I am not here to debate God. I am here to debate the stories in the bible from a historical stand point.

I have no doubt that there was a boat. I do doubt 2 pairs of each animal were on the boat and various other facets of the story were exaggerated or made up. That's beside the point. Does this mean that you scrub everything in the bible? Of course not! Evolution, Relativity, New

Are you saying humans couldn't build a submarine? Are you saying mathematics was invented by the Greeks?? Are you saying Sumerians didn't land in Egypt and hall their boats across the desert sands to re-deploy them into the Nile river then settle in Egypt? Are you saying that they weren't decedents of biblical figures? Are you saying that Tilmun is not really Edin? Are you saying that every time these myths are proven as history that you'll just continue acting like it's a myth?

Talking to someone that is closed off has no relevance. I don't believe it 100 percent but it's not to say that the history our ancestors recorded down for us to learn from possibly should be treated like utter garbage. And I am not talking about the bible, I am talking about the source material which the bible was made up of. It should be treated with the respect that it deserves.

heres a cool link about noahs ark being found.

www.wyattmuseum.com...

Originally posted by Quiintus
Maybe perhaps you want to look up the origins of the word Myth. So you might want to revise what you have said..

I know what the word 'myth' means and I still have the opinion that Noah's Ark is a myth.

They don't shun the evidence, as you clearly have.

What evidence? The only 'evidence' is science and science shows that 3 pairs of reproducing humans did not repopulate the entire earth. Science shows that there are no penguins or kangaroos or polar bears or ______ (fill in the animal of choice) living in that part of the world so therefore there was no boat that took them there to repopulate the earth.

If large parts of what they have talked about in the bible have been proven true, then why can't you fathom that this might also be true.

By that logic -
Large parts of the bible have been shown to be bunk.
So if large parts have shown to be bunk, then Noahs ark might also be bunk.

Are you saying ...

Are you talking to me???

I'm not saying anything except that Noahs Ark was a scientific impossibility. I have no idea where the rest of what you said came from.

I think of this as a regional event that has been passed to many cultures due to mankind's expansion over the planet.

I think it happened earlier than what mainstream scientists would accept with current timelines. A forced displacement of people from the Black Sea region which has a debatable time frame, could be the basis of this legend.

Others counter with the Persian Gulf being the place involved.

I heard years ago about a discovery in the late 80's in Turkey reported on mainstream media.It is supposedly one of the most sacred relic of esoteric religons and secret knowledge of brotherhoods.There is a legend engrained in legend which I discovered years ago that said the body of Adam was carried on the ark and became the holy relic used in the Ark of the Covenant and the link to God directly because the Ancient of Days fashioned Adam with his own hands.Here is a You tube vid, I just found:www.youtube.com...

There is a part 2 if this catchs your interest.


couldn't embed it...I was trying to get it to be already popped up without just a link, I see others doing it,Can someone give me a walk through on that sometime.I am going to get the link.

[edit on 16-12-2008 by Bruiex]

[edit on 16-12-2008 by Bruiex]

I guess the polar bears and penguins treaded water for 40 days.

But seriously, from the research I've done on it the flood's purpose according to the Bible was to eliminate the Nephilim and their offspring. I think it is completely possible Noah or whomever built a boat and loaded it up with supplies and survived a localized flood in which many people did not survive.

reply to post by FlyersFan


No you don't know what the word means if you're using it in the context which people use it today. Myth- Is history from for instance 'Sumerians' perspectives. Who the hell are you or any other person to come and change that? You might be the sheep that follows but what ever..

Large parts of the bible are shown be bunk? Have you researched it as well as these leading experts, have you?? These guys have cross referenced more than you ever will in your entire life time. David has the proof, the pottery in the ground, the cave art and the historical texts all match up.

And they don't come from a prejudice point of view like you and other people on this forum. He is in pursuit of the truth nothing more. Maybe you should read some of his findings then you can discuss it with me?

Scientifically Noah's ark is possible. If you think humans can't build a boat or a submarine then you've been proven wrong. And this discussion is over..

If you said they couldn't have made a submersible vessel in those days, then I'd see where you're coming from but then again nah I don't. You simply say it's not scientifically possible. Explain why aside from the fact that they didn't have penguins and kanaroos??

Is your argument about animals and people and a boat big enough to fit everything in it. Boats far bigger than the one proposed in the bible have been built these days, so how is it out of the realm of possibility??

Is it cos penguins and kangaroo's weren't mentioned in the story?? What about insects?? what happen to the insects? They somehow survived too. Could you fathom that the story may have been greatly exaggerated for story telling purposes. Why can't you look at it as part fiction part fact. Why does it have to be fiction or fact??


Mod Note: Excessive Quoting – Please Review This Link



[edit on Fri Dec 19 2008 by Jbird]

reply to post by Quiintus


I am telling you guys that this vid has a 20/20 episode on it that details everything about the find.It is exactly the size of the Ark dscribed in Genesis.www.youtube.com...

[edit on 16-12-2008 by Bruiex]

reply to post by Quiintus

Please only people that know something about this.

How rude is that?

Fine, I wont tell you what I know about Noah and his Ark then.







[edit on 16-12-2008 by silo13]

I think the submersible boat was not boat shape either in the Sumerian mythology. It was square shaped. So this conversation with this narrow minded guy above has sort of ended. He was arguing purely about the bible and penguins and kangaroos. What about Wombats? LOL

The point is, to have this discussion you have to transcend the bible stuff. See it as the illusion it is. They have some a lot of information that wasn't lost, but also a lot of confusion. Not that it hasn't been sorted out, if you actually have the brain to study up on it.

We are talking about Ziuzudra/Noah/Atrahasis but if you go by Davids work as well Enki, Ea, Yahweh are all the same guy. He proves this with many different characters from history and also so called mythical figures like Horus/Marduk for example. I believe I saw David Rohl's books at the back of Sitchins 12th Planet for cross referencing purposes.

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Quiintus

 

Please only people that know something about this.

How rude is that?

Fine, I wont tell you what I know about Noah and his Ark then.

I preferred to have a proper discussion about this. Not someone coming in going PENGUINS WEREN'T IN THE BIBLE IT'S NOT REAL! '

or BOATS COULDN'T BE MADE IN THOSE DAYS SO IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!

I guess I failed cos that's exactly what I got.

Anyone actually read this book?? I think Sitchin just skims on this stuff in his book.

David Rohl has made some remarkable discoveries directly and also indirectly. Indirectly he discovered where pre-flood garden of Edin was through an amateur scholar and then discovered where the second garden of Edin was. Figured out where the ark landed. Figured out that the Sumerians migrated to Egypt and re-established the chronology of Egypt in doing so. He has truly done some mind boggling work here.

Originally posted by silo13
reply to post by Quiintus

 

Please only people that know something about this.

How rude is that?

Fine, I wont tell you what I know about Noah and his Ark then.

[edit on 16-12-2008 by silo13]

Oh and that image is exactly what he's talking about in the book. It's not where the Ark landed. And ummm it's not the conventional boat shape according to the older source material. I've seen the doco's on that and though it's impressive you have to go with ancient scholars over modern day ones. They knew where it was.

Look up these facts:

From Ashes to Angels by Andrew Collins who discovered the remote Kurdish tribe call Yezidiz. They are a strange sect who worship the God Shaitan or better known to us as Satan. They claim to be decendents of biblical Seth, 3rd son of Adam. These people have been there hidden for since 5000 bc or so. They celebrate the day Noah landed and they are in direct contradiction of the bible on the traditional date of Sept 14th. They claim it happened on the 27th of May. They list Mount Judi as the place the ark came to resk.

And they aren't the only ones.

The bible states the mountains of Ararat
The Koran also claims it came to rest on mount Judi.
Josephus also says mount Judi near lake Van' is the where the ark came to rest.
10th century Muslim writer Ibn Haukal states that Judi is a mountain near Nisibis. It is said that the ark of Noah came to rest upon this summit.
Furthermore early Nestorian Christians built a number of monasteries on the slopes of Judi, and one called the 'The Cloister of the ark', on it's very summit. The latter was destroyed by fire in 766.
Eutychius of Alexandria informs us that the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat, that is Gebel Judi near Moshul, whic his 120 kilometers south of Judi Dagh.

Tradition claims that Sennacherib went to the resting place of the ark in the land of the Kurds and took a plank of wood from it. People think of this again as a myth. But I am sorry boys and girls Sennacherib left proof that he was actually there by carving several reliefs of him self at foot of the mountain.

Originally posted by Bruiex
reply to post by Quiintus

 

I am telling you guys that this vid has a 20/20 episode on it that details everything about the find.It is exactly the size of the Ark dscribed in Genesis.www.youtube.com...

[edit on 16-12-2008 by Bruiex]

It's not exactly... I watched the doco. It's not exactly. And it proves not much, other than a big boat ended up there. That's nowhere near the mounts summit. If you're going to go by the bible word for word, which we can't cos that boat in the doco is too wide or not wide enough, I can't remember.

I would be open to this but the evidence states otherwise..

[edit on 16-12-2008 by Quiintus]

Hi

I don't know if you would see this as relevent but it is taken from Project Camelot's interview with Bob Dean. Whether or not he is telling the truth is yet to be seen.

And so, the guys in the NRO took their Keyhole system and focused on the Ararat Anomaly, which is, you know, a puzzle. Well, when the word got out, when the pictures were finally down-loaded and they computerized and enhanced them and cleaned them up, and they pushed them on the wall or they broadcast them on the wall there at NRO, the remarks went something like this -- and these are actual quotes: Jesus Christ, it’s a god-damn boat! Christ! It’s a big boat!

Source

Hope this helps in your search.

[edit on 16-12-2008 by farther84]

[edit on 16-12-2008 by farther84]

If these two hucksters are such experts, the surely their proof of biblical history would be found the pages of any well respected and peer-reviewed archeological journal.

Find some for me. For that matter, what awards have they won or been nominated for due to their contributions to the sciences?

Further - if Noah's Ark did not happen as was told in the bible, then you're really not validating the bible are you? You're simply finding, perhaps, a source story from which exaggeration upon exaggeration has been piled on over the centuries until it no longer resembles anything close to the truth. I'm sure history contains lots of stories about men building boats to save their families and their livestocks from floods. What make's Noah's special if it did not happen the way the bible describes?

And as said... the story of Noah's Ark as described in the bible is pure fantasy. It's impossible, and every scrap of evidence that we have tells us so.

Oh, and myths are not history. They MAY contain a nugget of factual history behind them, but are so embellished and anthropomorphized that any semblance between the myth and real factual history is more or less coincidental.

[edit on 16-12-2008 by Lasheic]

Originally posted by Quiintus
Myth- Is history from for instance 'Sumerians' perspectives.

Summerian myth - a story based upon, and exaggerated upon, something that happened. AS I SAID - there was a worldwide flood but it definately didnt' go down as the bible story says.

And obviously I very much DO know what myth means. :shk:

Who the hell are you or any other person to come and change that? You might be the sheep that follows but what ever..

Listen up you little hampster .. I was VERY nice and yet you pony up this arrogant drivel? And you are WRONG on top of it.

Large parts of the bible are shown be bunk?

yes.

Maybe you should read some of his findings then you can discuss it with me?

Maybe you should take a science course and learn how to have a proper discussion with people without the attitude and then you can discuss it.

Scientifically Noah's ark is possible.

If you think humans can't build a boat or a submarine then you've been proven wrong.

No little man. Humans could build boats. They could for a long time. However, the story of Noahs Ark is MYTH which was poorly stolen from the Sumerians. And no single boat was built that carried two of every animal on the planet along with 3 preproductive pairs of humans. It's not scientifically possible. It's not genetically possible either.

And this discussion is over..

Apparently your condenscending attitude caused it never to being with in the first place.

Originally posted by silo13
How rude is that?

Exactly. A waste of time and bandwidth.

Originally posted by Quiintus
So this conversation with this narrow minded guy above has sort of ended.

1 - I'm a girl - not a 'guy'.
2 - Explaining that something is not scientifically possible is not being 'narrow minded'. It's being SMART.

He was arguing purely about the bible and penguins and kangaroos.

Wrong. The fact is that if there really were a boat full of every kind of animal on the planet then those animals would be found in the region that the boat landed. They simply are not. There are no penguins or polar bears on or near Mt. Ararat and they certainly couldn't have gotten themselves back to the north and south poles all by their little selves ... Common sense (something severely lacking in anyone who believes in the Noahs Ark myth)

Originally posted by Quiintus
I preferred to have a proper discussion about this.

That would include SCIENCE in the discussion. But apparently you only wish to pontificate and NOT have a 'proper discussion'.

Not someone coming in going PENGUINS WEREN'T IN THE BIBLE IT'S NOT REAL! '

1 - No one said 'penguins weren't in the bible it's not real'.
2 - You totally missed the point of what was said.
3 - It is a damn lie to claim I said that.

BOATS COULDN'T BE MADE IN THOSE DAYS SO IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!

No one said that either.

So it this all boils down to you wanting a thread to pontificate in and you tell lies about those who post information that disagrees with your stand.

Lovely waste of time.

Alrighty then...

The topic is, I'm just guessing here, Noah's Ark...remember that?

Personalities will stay out of this, starting now.

Thanks so much...

Noah's Ark is possible only to the extent that Noah may have taken two of every animal that was native to his region. There's no way two of every single animal on Earth was included. God gave Noah some time to get ready, but he didn't give him THAT much time.

The Bible is full of parables - the story of creation, Adam & Eve and, yes, Noah's Ark.