quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
Just show me the ark

If you can produce an ark then you have a single verifiable data point in the tales of the Bible

Are you kidding? Much of the Bible is very much supported by the archaeological record. Do some googling and start reading about the data points.

-Rob

quote:

Originally posted by BurtonRW:
Do you know how many of us you just called idiots? I’m pretty sure I’m not one, but being called an idiot for my faith by a non-believer is about as impactful as being called a racist, nazi, bigot, fascist, by a lefty these days.

First, I'm not a non-believer, I'm a practicing Catholic. Second, embrace your faith and more power to you, but you just can't deny legitimate scientific proof. Even if carbon dating is somewhat inaccurate, there is no squaring the difference between a few thousand years and 75,000,000 years. But, if that's what you believe? Good for you.

Regarding the supposed ark, It's been 50+ years since this was discovered. More than enough time to excavate this site and prove one way or the other what this thing is. It could be that the muslims in charge of Turkey are impeding that action, but I would like to see it.

quote:

Originally posted by Gustofer:
It could be that the muslims in charge of Turkey are impeding that action, but I would like to see it.

That seems unlikely based on Islamic doctrine. A synopsis provided by the AI Copilot:

“Muslims do believe in the story of the flood of Noah (known as Nūḥ in Arabic). It is a significant narrative in the Qur’an and shares many similarities with the Biblical account, though there are some differences in details and emphasis.” (References in the Qur’an are cited as well.)

Muslims in general seem to be less troubled by doubts about scriptural accounts than many Christians, but why wouldn’t they want one of their articles of faith to be confirmed by independent evidence?

And despite what many people believe:
“Allah* is the same monotheistic God worshipped by Abraham (Ibrāhīm), who is considered a major prophet and patriarch in Islam. … Muslims, Jews, and Christians are collectively referred to in the Qur’an as ‘People of the Book,’ and all trace their spiritual heritage to Abraham.”

* Literally: “The God.”

Personally, I don’t think these things are provable. Speculatively, I think we are not meant to prove it all out but instead develop faith which once in place, is more enduring than absolute proof. Proof can eventually be explained away. A faith based testimony, when continually cultivated, is not as likely defeated by a spiritual adversary looking to corrupt and separate us from God.

Has the ark been found? Is there evidence of Sodom/Gomorrah? Where’s the holy grail? These things could remain a mystery or be disproved by Andrew Dice Clay at the Improv. It will have no bearing on my faith nor testimony. That’s where I come in on this.

quote:

Originally posted by mdblanton:
About 12 minutes of insight from one of my favorite scholars:

Ken Ham is definitely a scholar. I've been to his Creation Museum and Ark Encounter.

Resources, especially pre-processed resources like lumber would be a premium.

Any Ark (tevah) would have been dismantled and used for shelter, livestock pens, tools, furniture and fuel rather quickly.

quote:

These things could remain a mystery or be disproved by Andrew Dice Clay at the Improv. It will have no bearing on my faith nor testimony. That’s where I come in on this.

That's the attitude of any believer reading the thread, I am sure.

Something like dinosaurs and, to a somewhat lesser extent, things like the ark, are matters that a believer ought to have a confident statement about, at the least.

In sharing the gospel, we'll come up against positions of skepticism reinforced by these and other things. All conversation on these matters is beneficial, as it helps believers discuss them with non-believers in future conversations. It makes us more effective in spreading the gospel.

Mars' post is especially practical. The ark is not one of those biblical things that "remains there to this day". So, it's likely that Mars' statement is true.

Dinosaurs are a bit more dynamic. The length of God's "day" actually being millions of years is the most logical explanation I have heard. There are other options here too, though. What matters is a believer's delivery of his statement on the matter being confident and concise, in an effort to promptly re-engage on the matter of salvation in Christ.

quote:

Muslims in general seem to be less troubled by doubts about scriptural accounts than many Christians

There's some unpacking to do there. The "many Christians" that are having doubts likely fall in the category of "will profess Christian faith if asked on a survey, but otherwise don't attend church, pray, read the bible, desire to live in accordance with His law and will, etc".

For the Christian, any argument related to time on the scale of the universe or creation is meaningless. First, time as we know it is part of the universe and, therefore, a created thing with no control over the creator. To put God in the context of some timeline is like saying an author's life is controlled by what he wrote on the page. God exists outside of "time" as we know it, and knows and sees the past, present, and future simultaneously. He can also create in the past, present, and future, just as the an author in a book could add earlier chapters without the characters in the book knowing.

Second, time in this creation, like velocity, can only be measured relative to something else. That means that the scale of it changes depending on the perspective of the measurer. It has been proven mathematically (see Einstein, Albert) and experimentally that time does not move at the same "speed" for all observers. It is possible for an event to happen in both a literal 24 hour day for one observer and a million years for another observer. When we read the creation account of Genesis 1, we don't know for certain what reference frame is being given. It's certainly not a day as we know it, since the sun was not in the sky until the 4th day of creation.

Regarding the "ark" in Turkey, my geology training (I'm a registered professional geologist) leads me to think it's likely a doubly plunging syncline. It looks natural to me. There's a lot of volcanism in that area, so I wouldn't be surprised if there's a laccolith under there that never surfaced.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
Resources, especially pre-processed resources like lumber would be a premium.

Any Ark (tevah) would have been dismantled and used for shelter, livestock pens, tools, furniture and fuel rather quickly.

True ..just like 1770's Indian raids/Revolutionary War settlers forts .Prickett's fort in Marion Co. West Virginia and Danial Boone's Boonsboro fort in Richmond Kentucky .after the Indian raids and Rev. War ended. Settlers .tore the forts apart and used the already cut logs to build barns and cabins and other things

quote:

Originally posted by sigfreund:
Muslims in general seem to be less troubled by doubts about scriptural accounts than many Christians ....

To clarify that statement, the most obvious reason is that Christians are free to think about and discuss questions relating to their faith, as we see even here. On the other hand, merely questioning matters relating to Islamic doctrine can literally get Muslims killed.

In Hebrew tevah is box, not boat.
Noah would have had no means to boil and bend lumber without a proper shipyard jig.
So it would have been a BIG box.

That is cool. I have never done the translation research on that. It's quite obvious though, considering the Ark or the Covenant. Certainly paints a different picture in one's mind's eye.

quote:

Originally posted by BurtonRW:

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
Just show me the ark

If you can produce an ark then you have a single verifiable data point in the tales of the Bible

Are you kidding? Much of the Bible is very much supported by the archaeological record. Do some googling and start reading about the data points.

-Rob

Incorrect. Archaeology confirms that the Christian Old Testament is a book of mythology.

There cannot have been a worldwide flood.

There was no exodus from Egypt.

There was no conquest by Joshua.

Ancient Hebrew people were NOT monotheists. Yaweh had a consort goddess and there were also other gods.

There is no evidence for the united kingdom of Saul / David / Solomon. The lack of evidence for Solomon is quite damning since he was supposed to be so great and well known.

For a primer I would suggest you start with the bible unearthed by Finklestein.

J. Adler's book has shows there is no evidence for widespread Judaism as we know it (dietary laws, ritual cleanliness, etc) prior to the Hasmonean dynasty.

quote:

Originally posted by LS1 GTO:

If God is eternal, why does one of His days need to equal 24 hrs and not more (or be variable)?

I asked a very learned holy man and asked him the same followed by the question, what if on the 8th day God sent His Son and, we are living the 9th day?

I may not be very learned nor holy as most people would think of the word but there are very good reasons why each one of the days God created is intended to be understood as the time for one earth’s rotation which is approximately 24 hours.

First, God created time. It was created as part of creation. “God in the beginning” was the mark of beginning of time and each successive passing day of creation was to the cadence of an evening followed by morning. The Hebrew calendar follows this cadence of each day beginning with an evening followed by morning.

Second, in transmitting the command to observe the sabbath, the explanation given in Exodus 20:8-12 is that the Israelites were to do all their work in literally the first six days of the week and to rest on the seventh because God Himself created the universe in six days and rested on the seventh. This explanation would only make sense if the creation was taken to be also literal days.

Third, Jesus Himself believed the literalness of the creation story and Genesis. In Matthew 19:4-5, Jesus believed in the literal creation of Adam and Eve. In Matthew 23:35, Jesus expressed belief in the literal murder of Abel. In Matthew 24:37-39, Jesus expressed belief in the literal flood of Noah. In Mark 2:27-29, Jesus expressed belief in the literalness of the sabbath.

One may argue that Jesus was just pushing the “company line,” but we have several instances of Jesus dispelling common misunderstandings of the learned religious leaders of the day. In Matthew 22:23-33, He clarified the reason for divorce in Matthew 19:3-9. He corrected the Sadducees’ belief that there won’t be any resurrection of the dead since it’s not supposedly explicitly stated in the Torah. In Matthew 12:1-8, Jesus argued against the sacrosanctness of the Sabbath in terms of doing work and in Luke 13:10-17 in terms of healing. Jesus’ sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:21-28) was a dissertation against what was commonly believed and taught compared to the original intent. “You have heard… but I say to you….”

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
I will believe in Noah's Ark when I see it unearthed and on display

until then, its a fairy tale

Jesus said unto him, “Thomas, because thou hast seen Me, thou hast believed. Blessed are they that have not seen and yet have believed.”

Alrighty then, move along. Nothing will be "proof" to those who do not believe. If it were unearthed and on display, it would be deemed a fake by non-believers.

And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

Personally, I'm with darthfuster:

quote:

Has the ark been found? Is there evidence of Sodom/Gomorrah? Where’s the holy grail? These things could remain a mystery or be disproved by Andrew Dice Clay at the Improv. It will have no bearing on my faith nor testimony. That’s where I come in on this.

"Proof" is not necessary.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: chellim1,

quote:

Originally posted by clayflingythingy:


Incorrect. Archaeology confirms that the Christian Old Testament is a book of mythology.

There cannot have been a worldwide flood.

There was no exodus from Egypt.

There was no conquest by Joshua.

Ancient Hebrew people were NOT monotheists. Yaweh had a consort goddess and there were also other gods.

There is no evidence for the united kingdom of Saul / David / Solomon. The lack of evidence for Solomon is quite damning since he was supposed to be so great and well known.

Oh look we found an expert on the Bible because he read one book with with an agenda...

The truth is, archaeologists keep making discoveries TO THIS DAY in that entire area that keeps proving the Bible is in fact real and not just fairytales or metaphors as many allege.

Here's a very recent one:

Pool of Siloam Discovery in 2004