The Search for Noah's Ark

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
Really?

Seems almost like the very definition suits them quite nicely.... Listening to ONE source to the exclusion of all others....

As opposed to the "open minded," that'll listen to every source EXCEPT our One.
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
When the weight of evidence is against you.......
How so? Archaeologists scoffed for almost a century at the Exodus until someone thought to look in the Gulf of Aqaba. Countless archaeological discoveries verify the reign of the kings mentioned in the Old Testament. Should we get into the Amarna letters? Or the conversion of Sir William Ramsay by the accuracy of Luke's Gospel?

Most (not all) don't want to acknowledge the accuracy of the Bible's history because to do so would lend credence to its spiritual claims. Regardless, the evidence backs up the claims of the Bible, if not the claims of every archaeologist who labels themselve Christian.
 
" the evidence backs up the claims of the Bible"
Yer gonna have to show that evidence....

Archeology.... geology... planet/cosmology... biology.... plus a whole lotta others all stand to refute the supposition of any Global Flood....

There more of Egypt we dig up the more we don't find ANY evidence that Hebrews were ever kept as slaves in Egypt.... Even that claim is looking highly suspect....

Archaeologists even debate about how much (If any) of David's and Solomon's stories are accurate......
 

smokin_si1138

New member
Clinton,

I totally agree with you!

Doc Savage,

I'm not sure where you get your info from, let me assure you... 99% of archaeologists still scoff at the idea of the Exodus.

You try and bring "Biblical" archaeology into any serious univeristy course and you will be laughed out. There has been some amazing attempts to crowbar the Biblical accounts into history all of which have failed.

As for the Gulf of Aqaba... I presume you are referring to Ron Wyatt and his amazing chariot wheel hub... hmmmm... again that's not evidence... it was a case of Wyatt interpreting what he saw as what he wanted. He found a chariot hub so it had to be from the Biblical account of the parting of teh red sea.

I mean there is no other explanation for a chariot wheel being on the bottom of a sea now is there? No no. This is a common occurance in the world of Biblical archaeology. Flimsy evidence = proof positive.

Ron Wyatt wasn't even an archaeologist! And more "wheels" have been found by who? Amateurs. Usually just divers. These wheels are more than likely just coral formations. Hell, the wheel hub he found has mysteriously vanished.

The possible mention of the Hebrew tribe within the Amarna letters is still a subject of great debate. And frankly even if the references are to the Hebrew's this doesn't mean that the Bible's accounts are historical.

And how on earth does one scientists claims that the Gospel of Luke was accurate (and remember he was working from the archaeological evidence of 100 years ago, when archaeology was in its infancy!) change anything?

Biblical archaeologists (and I've met a few) are almost fanatical. They crowbar their faith into known history and make the most incredible conclusions from the flimsiest evidence. They are a laughing stock amongst serious archaeologists, and frankly in most cases they deserve to be. I have NO respect for anyone who tries to warp history and prehistory to fit in with their own ideology.
 

qwerty

New member
smokin_si1138 said:
Clinton,

I totally agree with you!
Listen kidd. You are new around here so I should warn you.
Never say that to guys like clinton.
You will just fire them up, and then we will all be sorry.
 
Last edited:

smokin_si1138

New member
qwerty said:
Listen kidd. You are new around here so I should warn you.
Never say that to guys like clinton.
You will just fire them up, and then we will all be sorry.

Haha... I may be new around here, but I'm a trained archaeologist. And I find it very frustrating when people imply that "crackpot" theories are widely accepted amongst the archaeological community. They're not.

Clinton was bang on in what he said. So I told him so. Huzzah! ;)

Sheesh... Oct 2003? That long ago? Blimey... I think I only did one post back then!

One last thing... I'm not in any way attacking Doc Savage as a person... I'm engaging in a debate about theories here. I hope no one gets the wrong idea!
 
Last edited:

Doc Savage

New member
smokin_si1138 said:
Haha... I may be new around here, but I'm a trained archaeologist.

That explains the bias. And just for the record, archaeology is still in its infancy. So your "trained" expertise means little to me. Tennesse R, a dear friend of mine on these boards, has just as much field time as any "trained" archaeologist, if not more.

Two people look at one discovery. Observer A relates it to the Bible, while Observer B relates it to his textbook (which, coincidentally, is contradicted in subsequent years as more "experts" decide what happened). Theories change weekly while the Bible stays the same.

But I'm the crackpot.

"There has been some amazing attempts to crowbar the Biblical accounts into history all of which have failed. " That's very broad statement. Name some.

"As for the Gulf of Aqaba... I presume you are referring to Ron Wyatt and his amazing chariot wheel hub... hmmmm... again that's not evidence... it was a case of Wyatt interpreting what he saw as what he wanted." As is the case with all archaeology. Bottom line, as with Creation vs. evolution, we weren't there. The facts do fit the Biblical account when you consider the trade route along Pi-Hahiroth and the land bridge between its terminal peninsula and the shores of Arabia.

"The possible mention of the Hebrew tribe within the Amarna letters is still a subject of great debate. And frankly even if the references are to the Hebrew's this doesn't mean that the Bible's accounts are historical." Everything in archaeology is hotly debated. And the references don't imply that he Biblical accounts aren't accurate, either.

Take the city of Jericho. William Albright finds it and says "These walls fell flat." Another scientist (a lady, I believe, who's name escapes me) looks at the same evidence and says, "It didn't happen that way." Archaeology is study and inference. Facts are data open to interpretation.

But I'm the crackpot.
 

Tennessee R

New member
smokin_si1138 said:
As for the Gulf of Aqaba... I presume you are referring to Ron Wyatt and his amazing chariot wheel hub... hmmmm... again that's not evidence... it was a case of Wyatt interpreting what he saw as what he wanted. He found a chariot hub so it had to be from the Biblical account of the parting of teh red sea.

What Ron Wyatt found was 8 spoked. The only dynasty to ever use 8-spoked chariot wheels was 18th Dynasty. This puts us into a realistic time frame.

smokin_si1138 said:
Ron Wyatt wasn't even an archaeologist!

You mean he didn't have a degree in archaeology, don't you?

smokin_si1138 said:
And more "wheels" have been found by who? Amateurs. Usually just divers. These wheels are more than likely just coral formations.

This theory is incredibly true, and was actually stated by Ron.

smokin_si1138 said:
Hell, the wheel hub he found has mysteriously vanished.

Not true. it was handed over to the Director of Antiquities in Cairo. Now whether it was sealed in a box, and carted to the basement, never to be seen again, or if it is in the museum at cairo, I (personally) don't know. I can try to find out. But if I find that it actually is on display in the museum, would it change your opinion?
 
"Ron Wyatt is neither an archaeologist nor has he ever carried out a legally licensed excavation.. [His claims] fall into the category of trash which one finds in tabloids such as the National Enquirer, Sun etc."
-Joe Zias
-Curator of Anthropology/Archaeology
-Israel Antiquities Authority

"while the Bible stays the same.
But I'm the crackpot"

Do you still believe the world is flat? Or that the universe revolves around our planet? Or that it's o.k. to beat your wife and sell your children into slavery? These are just a few of the things we also thought we 'knew' 2 or 3 or 4 thousand years ago when the bible was being written.... So yes.... The Bible stays the same... to its detriment.
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
Do you still believe the world is flat? Or that the universe revolves around our planet? Or that it's o.k. to beat your wife and sell your children into slavery? These are just a few of the things we also thought we 'knew' 2 or 3 or 4 thousand years ago when the bible was being written.... So yes.... The Bible stays the same... to its detriment.
The Bible:
a) never states the world is flat
b) never states the universe is geocentric
c) never condones beating wives or selling children into slavery (just because some did doesn't mean God condones it)
...so what were we talking about?
 
Genesis 19:8: The men of Sodom gathered around Lot's house, and asked that he bring his two guests out so that the men can "know" them. This is frequently interpreted as a desire to gang rape the visitors, although other interpretations are possible. Lot offers his two virgin daughters to be raped instead: He is recorded as saying: "I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes." Yet, even after this despicable act, Lot is still regarded as an honorable man, worth saving from the destruction of the city. Allowing one's daughters to be sexually assaulted by multiple rapists appears to be treated as a minor transgression, because of the low status of the young women.

MoreChild abuse

Proverbs 23
23:13 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.
23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
Beat your children hard and often. Don't worry about hurting them. You may break a few bones and cause some brain damage, but it isn't going to kill them. And even if it does, they'll be better off for it. They'll thank you in heaven for beating the hell out of them.

How to sell your daughter
Exodus 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do. How to sell your daughter -- and what to do if she fails to please her new master.
"Exodus 21:7 says it's OK to sell your daughter into slavery. Not even in Nevada." -- Penn & Teller on the Bible
21:8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.

Capitol Punishment For Animals AND People....
21:28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit.
If an ox gores someone, "then the ox shall surely be stoned."
21:29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. (21:29, 32)
"The ox shall be stoned, and his owner shall be put to death."
If an ox gores someone due to the negligence of its owner, kill its owner and stone to death the ox.".

God's rules for disposing of hated wives.
If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate.... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you. -- Deuteronomy 22:13

Leviticus 18:19 Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness. "Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is apart for her uncleanness." (Don't even look at a menstruating woman.)

Numbers 3:15 Number the children of Levi after the house of their fathers, by their families: every male from a month old and upward shalt thou number them. (3:15-16) When "Moses numbered them according to the word of the Lord" he was told to count "every male from a month old and upward." Women and girls didn't count as persons. Neither did babies (or fetuses) under 1 month old. (So much for no abortions eh....)

Deuteronomy 28:56 The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,
28:57 And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them
"The tender and delicate woman" will be forced to eat her own children "that cometh out from between her feet."


Science and History
1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

In Genesis 1 the entire creation takes 6 days, but the universe is about 13.7 billion years old, with new stars constantly being formed.

Leviticus 11,
5-6... GOd thinks that hares and coneys chew the cud......
13-19... God thinks bats are birds.......

Numbers 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
So a graven image is a cure for snake bite????

Judges 5:31 So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.
Apparently, the sun goes around The Earth....

1 Chronicles 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
The Earth doesn't spin on its axis or travel about the sun??

And I'll stop there because the hatred, the lies, the wilfull ignorance in this revolting little book makes me nausious.....
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
Genesis 19:8
It never says Lot's actions were directed, or approved, by God.
ClintonHammond said:
Proverbs 23
23:13 Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.
23:14 Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell.
There's a world of difference between spanking and beating.
ClintonHammond said:
Exodus 21:7 And if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant, she shall not go out as the menservants do.
8 If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed: to sell her unto a strange nation he shall have no power, seeing he hath dealt deceitfully with her.
There's also a world of difference between a maid and a slave.
ClintonHammond said:
"Exodus 21:7 says it's OK to sell your daughter into slavery. Not even in Nevada." -- Penn & Teller on the Bible
Not exactly Bible scholars.
ClintonHammond said:
Capitol Punishment For Animals AND People....
21:28 If an ox gore a man or a woman, that they die: then the ox shall be surely stoned, and his flesh shall not be eaten; but the owner of the ox shall be quit.
29 But if the ox were wont to push with his horn in time past, and it hath been testified to his owner, and he hath not kept him in, but that he hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and his owner also shall be put to death. (21:29, 32)
Extreme, I admit. But if I had a child killed by an animal with a record of killing and the owner had refused to address it...
ClintonHammond said:
If any man take a wife, and go in unto her, and hate her, And give occasions of speech against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say, I took this woman, and when I came to her, I found her not a maid: Then shall the father of the damsel, and her mother, take and bring forth the tokens of the damsel's virginity unto the elders of the city in the gate.... But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father's house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father's house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you. -- Deuteronomy 22:13
I'll address this in a minute.
ClintonHammond said:
Leviticus 18:19 Also thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is put apart for her uncleanness.
A substantial part of Levitical law were hygenic in nature, far superior to the country they's been brought out of. Most of Egypt's medicinal "remedies" called for the use of various types of dung.
ClintonHammond said:
Neither did babies (or fetuses) under 1 month old. (So much for no abortions eh....)
I won't even justify that remark by calling it an extreme leap of faulty logic.
ClintonHammond said:
Deuteronomy 28:56 The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter,
28:57 And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them
Read in context, this is what would happen were Israel to be taken captive by a "nation of fierce countenance." God's Law was meant to keep them out of the curse placed on a fallen earth.
ClintonHammond said:
In Genesis 1 the entire creation takes 6 days, but the universe is about 13.7 billion years old, with new stars constantly being formed.
No one's seen a star 'born,' they've just seen spots getting brighter as surrounding dust or gas cleared.

ClintonHammond said:
Leviticus 11,
5-6... GOd thinks that hares and coneys chew the cud......
13-19... God thinks bats are birds.......
The word translated 'fowls' in the KJV is the Hebrew word 'owph, which literally means 'that flies' or 'flyer.'

ClintonHammond said:
Numbers 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
So a graven image is a cure for snake bite????
A typology of Christ on the cross (John 3:14)
ClintonHammond said:
Judges 5:31 So let all thine enemies perish, O LORD: but let them that love him be as the sun when he goeth forth in his might. And the land had rest forty years.
Apparently, the sun goes around The Earth....
Deborah and Barak sang that song, not God.
ClintonHammond said:
1 Chronicles 16:30 Fear before him, all the earth: the world also shall be stable, that it be not moved.
The Earth doesn't spin on its axis or travel about the sun??
Also read "the land shall be stable, that it be not overthrown."
ClintonHammond said:
And I'll stop there because the hatred, the lies, the wilfull ignorance in this revolting little book makes me nausious.....
Then you haven't been reading it correctly.
 

Doc Savage

New member
Now, to address the harshness of the Law...

God exists in an eternal state of perfection. Man was made in the express image of God, sinless and eternal. (Genesis 1:26,27) He was also made a free moral agent, not a witless automaton. Mankind's progenitors chose...poorly. They picked the advice of a fallen being (satan) over the Eternal Word of God, and in doing so brought the curse upon themselves. God is life. Sin separates from God. Sin, therefore, works death in the subject.

Enter God's Law: a precursor to the redemption of man. If you're wandering through a mine field and I've written you a letter expressly stating how to avoid the mines, you have a choice. You can either take my advice or not. I wrote the letter because I care deeply for you and would rather keep you in one peice. I wrote it because I know where the mines are, whether their location and decorum makes sense to you or not.

The Law shows us the absolute character of God: righteous, just, and beyond reproach. He wouldn't tell us to act contrary to His own Nature. It also shows how far man has fallen from his original position of God-likeness.

Enter the Lamb: One born w/o the fallen nature. One Who could walk out, by nature, the Law of God. One Who would then, by means of vicarious punishment, give us credit for that blameless walk.

Was the Law harsh? When viewed from our side. In actuality, it was a look at what man was supposed to be. But it all points to the mercy and love of God in the fact that, though we couldn't fulfill it, He did it for us.
 
"Then you haven't been reading it correctly."
What an incredibly arrogant and ignorant thing to say, as if one persons interpretation of any given mythology is more valid than any others.... As if you could somehow experience the exact same thing someone else experiences..... Or indeed that any one myth is more factual than another....

"I'll address this in a minute"
Like you were going to address the holes in your so-called Flood Myth? Or find sources to support your claim that Java Man was a hoax? Or.... or.... or....

Maybe, save your energy....

I still maintain Doc, that you and I are both atheists.... only I believe in one less 'god' than you do
 

Doc Savage

New member
ClintonHammond said:
"Then you haven't been reading it correctly."
What an incredibly arrogant and ignorant thing to say, as if one persons interpretation of any given mythology is more valid than any others.... As if you could somehow experience the exact same thing someone else experiences..... Or indeed that any one myth is more factual than another....
Or that you could interpret what billions other than myself see as the greatest love letter ever written to be filled with hate. My claim is no more objectively ignorant or arrogant than yours.
ClintonHammond said:
"I'll address this in a minute"
Like you were going to address the holes in your so-called Flood Myth? Or find sources to support your claim that Java Man was a hoax? Or.... or.... or....
You've yet to solidly refute anything I've said. All the evidence is still open to interpretation. Just to throw one in, why are there no erosion marks between the "millenia-old" layers?
ClintonHammond said:
I still maintain Doc, that you and I are both atheists.... only I believe in one less 'god' than you do
LOL.
 

fortuneandglory

New member
I see we have some "faithful" atheists (excuse the Oxymoron)...

You need to look at the bible as the past. Schools used paddles to "beat" children all the time, and still do in some cases. Biblical beatings were less than a fraternity hazing as far as *you* know. Things were different in the past, and *that* is what you *must* remember.
In other news...

The great biblical flood did probably happen.

The fact that the mesopotamian story of the flood is before the bibles account is because the bible was not being written by Noah himself. The accounts written in the bible are all secondhand (excuse the generalazation) except for the Gospels themselves. The fact that other cultures have a flood legend is fuel for a Christians fire.

I am disgusted at how Clinton has turned this thread into his own personal anti-religion rant. "Preach" your doctrine of indecision and hate somewhere else. Your hatred, lies, and willful ignorance in this post are revolting and make me nauseous.

If you dont believe the circumstantial evidence involving multiple legends... then believe the geological evidence. Around the same time in the Geologic Timeline that the Bible says there was a flood, beneath all the rock and stone, there is a layer of immense mud and other things condusive to a gigantic worldwide deluge. The reason that this supports the theory of a worldwide flood is because this gigantic layer is all over the world. Every continent has this layer.

As to another comment I saw on capitol punishment for animals... think about it for a second. When a pit bull starts ripping a kids arm off, what do you do with it? I'll give you one guess.

Euthanasia.

The only difference is you kill the animal with drugs instead of stones.

In any case, life was harsh back in the Old Testament, and punishment was as well because your sins had to be paid for. To cleanse yourself, you had to do something in return. That's why we have Jesus. The OLD TESTAMENT is here for us as history, so we know where we came from. The New Testament is here to guide us to heaven, because when Jesus came, he destroyed conceptions of what was right and wrong, and the Jewish "Powers that be" hated him for it. He saves us from the sin and chaos that went on in the old testamen, and you would do well to remember that.

The Bible did change. And Jesus is the reason.

Mankind's progenitors chose...poorly

Great use of quote Doc! Laughed my butt off... and I agree... but it had to be done.

As to you Clinton, every post I read of yours is ill thought out, and translated through your atheist mind. All that I have seen from you is hatred and incredible stupidity. The Atheist interprets facts to his Mindset, as does a Christian... however, Atheists ignore facts to uphold they're doctorine of indesicion. I agree that some Christians do this as well, but nothing so far has proven or disproven the Bible. The fact is, you're posts are cruel, full of hate and lies, and you are terribly concieted.

"Then you haven't been reading it correctly."
What an incredibly arrogant and ignorant thing to say, as if one persons interpretation of any given mythology is more valid than any others.... As if you could somehow experience the exact same thing someone else experiences..... Or indeed that any one myth is more factual than another....

And you have a forked tounge it seems...

You've yet to solidly refute anything I've said"

Then you haven't been reading correctly....

Try to remember what you say, and not repeat what you think is a mistake for others to say themselves.
 
Last edited:
Top