Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Although I believe in the story of the ark, you can't use a coin struck after the time of Jesus as proof it happened. They could have made it commemorating the event out of scripture.
It's like someone digging around Southern California thousands of years from now, finding a coin made at Disneyland and declaring Mickey Mouse was a real person.
You mean...He isn't? but everyone knows about him. Vietnam grunts marched into battle singing his praises! Millions...well, a lot..would not die for a lie!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
This thread is not about whether or not an ancient writer was correct or not. It is about ANY HISTORIC EVIDENCE OF NOAH'S ARK.
How many times do I have to repeat this? If you want to disprove historic accounts, start your own thread.
I see. It not only excludes factual evidence or feasibility or geooigical evidence (is it really all so much against your preferred beliefs?) but anything other than the unquestioning collation of anything that looks like it supports it. Could demanding that everyone pander to your confirmation bias be any more evident?
In any case, old chum, you are advised that I shall post what I feel is appropriate and you can freeze dry your Rules and eat them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
No, but it would prove Disneyland was a real place.
...
As is Mt. Ararat. But, just as Disneyland is a modern location referring back to a land that never really existed, Mt Ararat is (for all we know) a name given to a likely mountain in Armenia that historically has no more to do with Noah's Ark than Florida or Paris has to do with Donald Duck.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 04-23-2014 at 07:10 AM..
No, but it would prove Disneyland was a real place.
This thread is not about picking apart historic evidence OF Noah's Ark. It is only about historic evidence of Noah's Ark. People are free to post their findings in this thread. Remember, this thread is not about whether or not Noah's Ark existed but about any historic evidence of Noah's Ark. Thank you.
So this thread is only for people who agree with you? You presented something you claim is "historical evidence" when it isn't. Last time I looked, posters are free to offer a differing opinion to other posts. If you start a thread about a topic and post what someone views as erroneous, they are free to refute your post. It's still on topic.
Using your logic, ANY coin is historical evidence of a person, place or event. It doesn't hold up. A coin with Peter Pan and Capt. Hook on it doesn't prove their existence. Also using your logic regarding the Mickey Mouse coin, the Noah coin only proves that the story exists.
The person who struck the coin 1700 years ago could be someone who believed the scriptures and wanted to depict the story. It's not historical evidence of anything.
"..."It is said there is still some part of this ship in Armenia, at the mountain of the Cordyaeans; and that some people carry off pieces of the bitumen, which they take away, and use chiefly as amulets for the averting of mischiefs." .... it is reported... that the remains of the timber were a great while preserved."
It is reported and said and the upshot is that while the timbers are not there any longer the bitumen remains. Not today, though.
Eusebius, this stuff is hearsay and without provenance. The various relics from petrified wood to bitumen and Wyatt's cat fur (no organic material had come to hand from any more recent examination - other than that discredited NAMI timber) suggest that none of the supposed relics can be given any credibility even if we could be sure that they actually came from the site.
The thing about historians is that they may report what occurred in their lifetimes and in that respect Josephus carries a lot of weight. Or they may collate material on times long before from whatever sources they have. He has the Bible, Berosus,some other anecdotes. Like Josephus on the Hyksos, his reliability fails on such material from so much before his time.
"The Jewish historian Josephus refers to numerous historical sources which attest that the Ark was freely accessible and indeed venerated in their times:
"However, the Armenians call this place, The Place of Descent; for the ark being saved in that place, its remains are shown there by the inhabitants to this day…â€
"The Jewish historian Josephus refers to numerous historical sources which attest that the Ark was freely accessible and indeed venerated in their times:
"However, the Armenians call this place, The Place of Descent; for the ark being saved in that place, its remains are shown there by the inhabitants to this day…”
Josephus refers to sources which, when describing events that exist only in books of myth, are without much reliability and therefore, neither is he, on non -contemporary events. And a boat-shaped rock outcrop is still shown to tourists today. I might suggest that is why Ararat was selected as the mountain in the first place - there are dozens of other mountains, some higher that Ararat, in the locality.
Last edited by Miss Blue; 04-23-2014 at 07:46 AM..
I guess I have to repeat myself for those who just can't seem to follow instructions.
This thread is not about your personal opinion. It is only about posting historic evidence OF Noah's Ark.
It is not to produce PROOF of Noah's Ark. . . . just evidence OF Noah's ark.
It is not to give opinions as to whether or not the evidence is wrong or right.
Such evidence to post would be ancient writings concerning the ark.
Ok, I get it now.
So I was at church and some of the Sunday School children drew pictures of Noah's Ark. I believe this is historical evidence of the Ark. And no one can argue with that.
So I was at church and some of the Sunday School children drew pictures of Noah's Ark. I believe this is historical evidence of the Ark. And no one can argue with that.
But not very ancient history, I'm afraid.
Eusebius is trying to look a little further back than last week, I think.
Eusebius is trying to look a little further back than last week, I think.
It really doesn't matter how far he looks back. If he doesn't have a newspaper from the town of Noah's residence reporting on the neighbors complaining about the huge edifice being built in Noah's driveway, then we don't have a contemporary account. Without such provenance, old writings, such as those of Josephus, have no more credibility that the kids' drawings mentioned above.
It would seem to me that moving lions, zebras, and elephants into the middle east for embarkation on the ark would have attracted enough attention for somebody have written about it.
Therefore, my understanding of this whole little game is to collect old writings so Eucie can feel that his beliefs are justified.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but everyone knows about him. Vietnam grunts marched into battle singing his praises! Millions...well, a lot..would not die for a lie! 
It not only excludes factual evidence or feasibility or geooigical evidence (is it really all so much against your preferred beliefs?) but anything other than the unquestioning collation of anything that looks like it supports it. Could demanding that everyone pander to your confirmation bias be any more evident? 
