What If... (church, believe, Christ, Bible)

[BudinAk]

From time to time we hear claims of someone discovering the original Ark of the Covenent, Noah's Ark, gold-plated chariot wheels at the bottem of the ocean (from the Red Sea crossing) etc, etc. But, so far, none have been proven to be actual fact by followup evidence. (IE: photos from the press, verified proof by unbiased scientists, etc) And....none of us have been able to just walk up to any of these and see for ourselves. (I believe they are/were real artifacts, but where are they?)

I was just thinking this morning: WHAT IF...
What impact, and changes, do you think would happen in the world today if any of these ancient relics were to be found, AND brought out for all to see, touch, examine, etc????
What would your response and feelings be?

Can't you just see the news headline: "NEWS FLASH: SCIENTISTS STUMBLE ACROSS NOAH'S ARK DURING MOUNTAIN SURVEY!"

Or: "JERUSALEM CITY WORKER ACCIDENTLY FINDS ARK OF THE COVENENT WHILE DIGGING UP BUILDING FOUNDATION"....

Yeah, I know: a church in Ethiopia claims to have the original Ark of the Covenant hidden away. Well...ok...good for them. But why can't we see it? I say "prove it", otherwise it is hearsay. We don't know for sure what it is that they have, or even know what it looks like...all we have is a basic description. This "go away...leave us alone...no you can't see it, it's ours, not yours..." response (so far) is really aggravating.

Bud

[firstborn888]

It seems like these guys (some of them) are out to make a buck or get famous at the expense of bible enthusiasts?

ark of the covenant, ron wyatt

Don't know but when my daughter and I saw that the ark had been found we said "What??? This is front page news!!!"

The more we dug the more saw this fantastic story which basically could not be substantiated for one reason or another. Sesational claims of the blood of Christ literally running down through a crack in the ground onto the ark in a small cavern under the cross. How cool is that??? Well, it's cool for sure - but the more you study this guy the more it seems like the findings are not credible, that there's always some reason why they can't be proven.

In the long-run these guys seem to discredit more than substantiate? What do you guys think?