• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Noah's ark...

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
Whole cities, cultures, populations have disappeared, been lost over the last 2000 years.

Why would you think a wooden ship would survive and be found?
Yes, it probably would have disappeared, taken apart by those wanting a “piece of history”, millennia ago. I know I’d have taken a piece, if I could’ve.
But since it was covered “inside and out” with tar….maybe some pieces remain, who knows.
IMO
 

Hockeycowboy

Witness for Jehovah
Premium Member
I know that there are not enough water molecules within the geosphere to cover the earth in water. Let alone to cover all the mounts as the Biblical text claims. I know that the civilizations that existed before the alleged flood, existed after as well. I know that a wooden boat the size of the Arke would crack under its own weight. I know that the world's flora would all be dead after a worldwide flood. Also the plankton and the coral. Neither of which happened. I know that such a rain would produce so much heat and pressure that the world would still be well over the boiling point of water. I know that there was never a worldwide flood.
It was an event controlled by God. We can’t expect to find certain evidences through applying natural parameters.

(Does the Genesis account say that God wanted to kill vegetation? No.)

But we can look for evidence of its aftermath.

One of the largest evidences - in scope - is the fresh-water Permafrost, for example, and the animals encased within it. Some remains have been found extremely well-preserved.

Regarding the amount of water needed to cover mountains, the Bible explains this, too, at Psalm 104:8-9, (NASB 1995)
“The mountains rose; the valleys sank down To the place which You established for them”

This would imply the Earth’s topography was smoother; some mountain ranges weren’t as high as they are today.
And we observe some youthful-looking mountain ranges, like the Rockies, Himalayas, etc. Their rocks are old, though. The features they form though, on some, aren’t. These features just have not experienced the weathering and erosion that we’d expect on something that’s claimed to be millions of years old.

Then we have the Flood legends… we would expect such a calamity would be remembered by humanity’s cultures, in many different stories. It is.

There is other evidence, but I’ll stop here.

And I have to add, “IMO.”
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Yes, it probably would have disappeared, taken apart by those wanting a “piece of history”, millennia ago. I know I’d have taken a piece, if I could’ve.
But since it was covered “inside and out” with tar….maybe some pieces remain, who knows.
IMO
There was no "ark".
 
Top