Bible Study Curriculum

 

Current Issue


IN THE APRIL EDITION:

The Significance of Holy Week
What is Advocacy--and Why
    Should We Care?
Chaplains Help Others Grieve,
    and Learn to Grieve
    Themselves

Baptists Today news journal contains original content found nowhere else. Subscribe now.

 

Search Baptists Today

 

 

Baptists Today Video

 

 

 

 

« Babbling on, or ...? | Main | Ugly actions for ugly shoes ... »
Friday
Dec302011

Not an ark, but interesting ...

Bible readers remember Mount Ararat, in northern Turkey (though also claimed by Armenia), as the final port for Noah's ark, according to Genesis 8:4, which says it came to rest "on the mountains of Ararat" (though the word could also be translated as "Urartu," a reference to the general area, but no specific mountain).  There are actually two distinctive peaks called Ararat: Armenians call the largest mountain "Big Ararat," and a smaller adjacent mountain, a perfect volcanic cone, "Little Ararat."

According to ArtDaily.org, Joel Klenck, a Harvard-trained archaeologist who's head of the Paleontological Research Corporation has described surveys of two cave sites on Mount Ararat (the big one, presumably), both containing large wood structures that date back to the Epipaleolithic period, with radiocarbon dates suggesting sometime between 13,100 and 9,600 B.C.

The finds won't do anything to bolster the persistent ark hunters who periodically claim to have found remains of Noah's Ark -- they actually seem to have been some sort of multi-level residential construction, including stairs. Unfortunately, the site is mostly covered with ice and stones that have accreted through the years, and it's at an altitude of 4,200 meters (about 2.6 miles), so it won't be easy to examine closely.

Still, it's fascinating to imagine what the people would have been like who lived and apparently thrived there 12,000 years ago -- and even more intriguing to envision what they would think of their descendants, as we enter 2012.

And it could possibly worth asking, which group should be considered more civilized?

Reader Comments (2)

Tony,

Can't be the Ark. And can't be real. Ken Ham will not accept anything being older than about 6,000 years or so. For Ham and his minions, this must be some fakery, and anyone who says otherwise must be an unregenerate.

On the other hand. What an interesting archeological find. It means anyone finding ancient wood in that area now has an alternative explanation to defeat before they can claim to have found Noah's boat.

Dec 30, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterArce

Certainly 12-15,000 years is a long time ago, several thousand years before the first evidence of writing. Carbon dated wood is important. Beyond such tangible evidence, DNA evidence is rapidly accumulating that purports a common ancestor existed tens of thousands of years ago. I find it fascinating to think about human life that preceded dates suggested by Biblical sources.

Jan 3, 2012 | Unregistered CommenterGene Prescott

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>