Existence of Noah's Ark

quote:

---

Originally posted by riVeRraT

​

If it rained like I said it would, the ark would be washed out to sea.

---

And what, then, would wash it back into the mountains of Ararat?

quote:

---

Originally posted by riVeRraT

​

Side note, is this webpage an indication that the ark may not be on the mountain, or the translation is messed up?

---

quote:

---

Genesis 8:4

​

And rested the Ark . . . upon the mountains of Ararat.

---

על הָרֵי אררט (al harai Ararat) = "upon the mountains of Ararat" הָרֵי (harai) is in the plural construct form = "mountains of . . ."If a single mountain were meant, the singular construct הַר would be used. Which, in this case, is identical with the singular absolute, i.e. simply "har".Thus, the verse says that the ark came to rest upon the mountains of Ararat, indicating a region rather than a particular mountain.Amlodhi

quote:

---

Originally posted by riVeRraT

​

I'm not saying it would be on that mountain afterwards.
The bible could be wrong in its translation of that event.

---

The problem here is that the bible wouldn't be "wrong in its translation", it would just be wrong. And as Ned has so eloquently pointed out, if you have to re-write the story in an attempt to prove it, what's the point?Amlodhi

quote:

---

Originally posted by riVeRraT

​

Maybe I am missing something here, but on that web page it says:
Ararat is the resting place of Noah's ark is based on a misreading of Gen. 8.4

---

Yes. Mt Ararat (singular: as a specific mountain) is a misreading of Gen. 8:4 which properly translated reads: "the mountains of Ararat (i.e., a range of mountains in a given region).

quote:

---

riVeRraT:

​

It is also a separate issue.

---

Yes, it is a separate issue. But you asked, so I provided you with the answer.Amlodhi

quote:

---

Originally posted by riVeRraT

​

Ok, then if it is a mis-reading, is it possible that the ark could have wound up at the base of those mountains, which I think is the black sea?

---

Yes, IMO, it could have wound up at the base of those mountains. However, mountains rarely stick up out of flat ground like mushrooms. Rather, there are elevated peaks along a range or ridgeline. So Rei is almost certainly correct in that it would still be a higher elevation than the starting point.I'm not sure what you mean by "(you) think it is the Black Sea". As far as I know, there is no indication that the Black Sea ever extended into Armenia.Also, I don't know what the Black Sea would have to do with your rain/water-sluice hypothesis. The Black Sea premise is that at the end of the last ice age, rising ocean levels swelled the Mediterranean Sea until the force of the water breached through into the Bosphorus valley. This flood of salt/sea water flowed into what was then a fresh water lake, significantly increasing its volume and salinity. Thus creating what is now called the Black Sea. In the map above, in the upper right-hand corner of the Mediterranean Sea, you can see the Bosphorus strait connecting the Mediterranean to the Black Sea. This is where the water is thought to have breached into the (then) freshwater lake.The Ararat mountain range is in Armenia (also shown on the above map). Mt. Ararat itself is located just below the arrowhead pointing into Armenia.I hope this helps you some, but again, you are juggling so many mutually incompatible speculations it is difficult to decide just what you are trying to accomplish.Amlodhi

quote:

---

Originally posted by Rrhain

​

Look, if you're just going to invoke magic, then say so and be done with it. Stop trying to play physicist and pretend that there is a physical way to suspend 109 cubic miles of water in the air and still have anything living on the planet.

---

Is it time for another look at this? Thanks again to LAM, for making this image available.Amlodhi