Historical Evidence of Noah's Ark (tradition, myths, Revelation, Bible)
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.
Let's not go over again all the back and forth fightings if it were possible for Noah's Ark to be feasible.
I think the above link is very important to understanding the historic accounts of an actual ship built by Noah.j
This thread is ONLY about historical evidence for Noah's ark. If you find any more historical evidence, please post it.
This thread is NOT about "where did all the water come from," or "could the ark survive such a flood." It is not about "how many animals could Noah fit on the ark." It is not about "how could Noah feed all the animals." It is ONLY about historical evidence about Noah's ark.
Last edited by Miss Blue; 04-20-2014 at 08:48 PM..
Reason: red font is reserved for moderation..use any other color
If all these flood stories are unique and not a result of transmission (which many are) all it would suggest is that there was a catastrophe of some sort not that it proves Noah, his boat, his Flood or its global nature or that YHWH is true or that the Bible is inspired by YHWH.
Let's not go over again all the back and forth fightings if it were possible for Noah's Ark to be feasible.
I think the above link is very important to understanding the historic accounts of an actual ship built by Noah.j
This thread is ONLY about historical evidence for Noah's ark. If you find any more historical evidence, please post it.
This thread is NOT about "where did all the water come from," or "could the ark survive such a flood." It is not about "how many animals could Noah fit on the ark." It is not about "how could Noah feed all the animals." It is ONLY about historical evidence about Noah's ark.
There are two points, here.
(1) there are a lot of flood -stories.
(2) there is a Mespotamian myth with a description of a flood with a very recognizable Mespotamian Noah (Ut-Napishtim or Atram-hasis).
In the case of the first collection of flood -myths, the revelation of a global flood in Mesolithic times at the end of an ice -age could explain why there are so many flood legends. They are not in themselves evidence for the particular flood described in Genesis (and like you, Eusebius, I would say that this is about historical - in a broad sense- evidence for Noah's Ark being real history, niot about whether a not total flood disproves the Biblical reason why it was caused)
In the case of the second, this seems to be based in a more recent experience of a a series of riparian floods caused in the Mesopotamian plain by rainstorms, perhaps swelling the rivers in the mountains.
The evidence of water deposits in Ur seemed at first to be evidence of a flood (nothing like the 100 -foot rock deposits supposed to be Flood - deposits) but turned out to peter out on the outskirts of Ur. That is the only indication of the Mesopotamian flood other than, I suppose, the lower Mesopotamian silt -plains.
If the Mesopotamian flood is a story based on experience of those which are strictly local ones, then the Noachian flood in the Bible is more closely based on those than on any other flood - story. In fact, it suggests a later development of a rather primitive story in that the Ark had to be more advanced and contain a lot more animals. It was not just Sumerian civilization that had to be wiped out - it had to be all creation.
Thus the mesopotamian flood story is, I would say, more the historical basis for the Biblical flood and the other global flood legends are nothing to do with it.
The historical evidence is that the Mesopotamian story is the basis of the Genesis story, because it survives in contemporary cuneiform from the earliest Euphrates civilizations and re-used in Babylon and Assyria with just the tribal god being changed. The Genesis flood is found nowhere outside the Bible. The Mesopotamian flood - legend was ancient, well - known and the basis for the Biblical one, not the Genesis account being the origin of the Sumerian story - if we go by historical evidence.
If we are talking of archaeological evidence for the Ark, there is none. The supposed reports of relics from Mt. Ararat were always uncheckable, anecdotal and dubious, despite the 'why would they risk their reputations for a lie?' efforts to validate the stories through the back door. The Durupinar ark pretty much in the foothills, and not on top of Ararat,was dug and yielded nothing but rock and mineral deposits and dirt.
The NAMI Ark -claim,sited above the snow-line rests on some photos and videos of compartments and walls of pretty evident logs.Though some photos of walls seemed to indicate petrified layers. I recall also some claims of aerial photos of a large block that had slid down the snow-slope. It looked to me like a block of snow that had come loose. And the Nami Ark seemed to postulate that the ark was still buried under the snow, and indeed rock, if petrification had taken place.
Both Ark - claims are now seriously doubted even by Christians and Creationists. So, the sum total of historical evidence for the Ark seems to be in total, Nil. at most, with some evidence arguing against it.
Last edited by Miss Blue; 04-23-2014 at 07:48 AM..
If all these flood stories are unique and not a result of transmission (which many are) all it would suggest is that there was a catastrophe of some sort not that it proves Noah, his boat, his Flood or its global nature or that YHWH is true or that the Bible is inspired by YHWH.
This thread is ONLY about historical evidence of Noah's Ark. It is not about proving Noah built an ark or if there was a global flood. It is only about finding historical evidence of Noah's Ark. Noah's Ark. Noah's Ark.
(2) there is a Mespotamian myth with a description of a flood with a very recognizable Mespotamian Noah (Ut-Napishtim or Atram-hasis).
In the case of the first collection of flood -myths, the revelation of a global flood in Mesolithic times at the end of an ice -age could explain why there are so many flood legends. They are not in themselves evidence for the particular flood described in Genesis (and like you, Eusebius, I would say that this is about historical - in a broad sense- evidence for Noah's Ark being real history, niot about whether a not total flood disproves the Biblical reason why it was caused)
In the case of the second, this seems to be based in a more recent experience of a a series of riparian floods caused in the Mesopotamian plain by rainstorms, perhaps swelling the rivers in the mountains.
The evidence of water deposits in Ur seemed at first to be evidence of a flood (nothing like the 100 -foot rock deposits supposed to be Flood - deposits) but turned out to peter out on the outskirts of Ur. That is the only indication of the Mesopotamian flood other than, I suppose, the lower Mesopotamian silt -plains.
If the Mesopotamian flood is a story based on experience of those which are strictly local ones, then the Noachian flood in the Bible is more closely based on those than on any other flood - story. In fact, it suggests a later development of a rather primitive story in that the Ark had to be more advanced and contain a lot more animals. It was not just Sumerian civilization that had to be wiped out - it had to be all creation.
Thus the mesopotamian flood story is, I would say, more the historical basis for the Biblical flood and the other global flood legends are nothing to do with it.
The historical evidence is that the Mesopotamian story is the basis of the Genesis story, because it survives in contemporary cuneiform from the earliest Euphrates civilizations and re-used in Babylon and Assyria with just the tribal god being changed. The Genesis flood is found nowhere outside the Bible. The Mesopotamian flood - legend was ancient, well - known and the basis for the Biblical one, not the Genesis account being the origin of the Sumerian story - if we go by historical evidence.
If we are talking of archaeological evidence for the Ark, there is none. The supposed reports of relics from Mt. Ararat were always uncheckable, anecdotal and dubious, despite the 'why would they risk their reputations for a lie?' efforts to validate the stories through the back door. The Durupinar ark pretty much in the foothills, and not on top of Ararat,was dug and yielded nothing but rock and mineral deposits and dirt.
The NAMI Ark -claim,sited above the snow-line rests on some photos and videos of compartments and walls of pretty evident logs.Though some photos of walls seemed to indicate petrified layers. I recall also some claims of aerial photos of a large block that had slid down the snow-slope. It looked to me like a block of snow that had come loose. And the Nami Ark seemed to postulate that the ark was still buried under the snow, and indeed rock, if petrification had taken place.
Both Ark - claims are now seriously doubted even by Christians and Creationists. So, the sum total of historical evidence for the Ark seems to be in total, Nil. at most, with some evidence arguing against it.
Red, by the way, is for moderators' use.
Please re-read my request in my original post. This thread is ONLY about FINDING HISTORICAL EVIDENCE FOR NOAH'S ARK.
If you find some historian who wrote about NOAH"S ARK then by all means share it with us.
Last edited by Miss Blue; 04-20-2014 at 08:50 PM..
Reason: do not use the red font as it confuses some posters with moderation edits
People often build in flood plains. Certain cultures like the Egyptians relied on flooding of the Nile. Sometimes the flood was less then anticipated leading to less crops, other times it was too much leading to devastation.
You still have people building in flood areas and then acting all surprised when five or twenty years like clockwork the area floods and destroys buildings and kills people.
You can build to mitigate flood damage , raised buildings, not having anything valuable or that would be ruined by the raising waters in the first twenty or thirty feet of the building. So all you would do after the flood is just wipe down the floors and remove any debris the water brought in while everything higher would never have been in danger from the water.
People often build in flood plains. Certain cultures like the Egyptians relied on flooding of the Nile. Sometimes the flood was less then anticipated leading to less crops, other times it was too much leading to devastation.
You still have people building in flood areas and then acting all surprised when five or twenty years like clockwork the area floods and destroys buildings and kills people.
You can build to mitigate flood damage , raised buildings, not having anything valuable or that would be ruined by the raising waters in the first twenty or thirty feet of the building. So all you would do after the flood is just wipe down the floors and remove any debris the water brought in while everything higher would never have been in danger from the water.
This thread is not what people did in flood plains. It is about producing historical evidence for Noah's Ark.
This thread is not what people did in flood plains. It is about producing historical evidence for Noah's Ark.
And what I stated is that flood myths were created because people had floods where they lived.
Guess what that is where the flood myths came from where the people had devastating floods so they made up stories of mega huge floods.
Also the wording in the hebrew is local flood. Not all over the world. There is no historical evidence of an ark.
Historical evidence that the myth in the Bible is from earlier myths yes there is evidence of that. It all shows the Bible is a book of fables that began as oral tradition from a bunch of illiterate goat and sheep herders who often got too friendly with the flock.
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.
