Noah's Flood - Universal? #4
Still more reasons it was not
Written and compiled
by
Keith Hunt
THE ARK,
ITS SIZE AND PURPOSE
Woodrow in his book asks the questions if you can for
certain know how large the ark was, did it take 120 years to
build, and if the flood was REGIONAL were there some people in
other parts of the world who were not effected by that flood?
Genesis 6:15 gives the dimensions of the ark 300 cubits
long, 50 cubits wide, and 30 cubits high. Some say that was
proportionally ideal - being six times as long as wide.
The problem arises with knowing how many inches to the cubit
it was back in Noah's day, or Moses day, as it was Moses who is
held by most scholars as writing the first five books of the
Bible.
If we go with 18 inches to the cubit, then the dimensions
would be as Woodrow states, 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45
feet high.
Woodrow suggests that the door way would not have been over
13 feet high, because dividing the three levels would give 15
feet to each level. with this calculation Woodrow says there had
to be large supporting beams to hold the weight of each level,
hence the doors ways would be, or could be, about 13 feet in
hight. This would of course mean large Elephants and Giraffes
would not be able to go through the door ways as Woodrow
suggests.
But the problem with this reasoning is that the top floor
may have been open at first and a ramp may have been built to
allow these huge animals to ascend to the top of the ark and then
a ramp could have been built to have them descend to a floor that
did not have to have a doorway at all. After all the animals were
in that top shaft door closed tight, so no other humans could
have a way into the ark.
Now if as Woodrow suggests the cubit in past ages differed
and was smaller than 18 inches in length during Noah's time, then
of course a smaller ark would have been built, which if it was
only for a regional flood would have sufficed. Woodrow quotes
from Harper's Bible Dictionary these words:
"Metrology (the science of measurement of mass, length, and time)
presents a confused picture in Palestine ... and the peripheral
countries ... Not even well-grounded Babylonian metrology adhered
to the same standard throughout its history. In the matter of
weights and measures, the Hebrew people were influenced by
Babylonian, Egyptian, Canaanite-Phoenician, and Greco-Roman
systems ... With the coming of each new conqueror, and with every
fresh trend in trade, weights and measures continued to vary."
Woodrow gives proof from the Bible itself that a cubit may
have varied in length at times and in different ages. Esther
5:14; 7:9 shows the gallows which Haman was to be hanged on was
50 cubits, and so if we go with 18 inches for a cubit the gallows
was 75 feet high. Either it was built with a high foundation as
to make sure everyone from a far distance could see Haman get
hanged, or the cubit was much less than 18 inches during the time
of Esther.
Woodrow does SPECULATE with things in this section of his
study, but he does admit it is only "speculation." He wonders
that if the ark was 450 long how it could have been built as the
tallest tree in the world is a California Coast Redwood at 366.2
feet.
Once more I will say that looking at what is TODAY does not
mean it was that way in Noah's time. Maybe there were trees
taller than the tallest trees of today in existence during Noah's
life time, or there were ways of building ships back then that
are lost in building today. Science is still amazed at how the
GREAT PYRAMID of Egypt was ever built.
As Woodrow himself admits, this is all conjecture and
speculation for we simply cannot be certain as to the length of a
cubit in Noah or Moses' time.
And with all that said, we come back to the conclusion that
none of what we have talked about concerning the size of the ark
can prove a world-wide flood or a regional flood.
LENGTH OF TIME IN BUILDING THE ARK?
Most people have either been taught or have presumed from a
too casual reading of Genesis 6, that Noah was building the ark
for 120 years. Of course this also makes it easy to believe that
the ark was so large that it took 120 to build it. Genesis 6:3
says, "My spirit shall not always strive with man ... yet his
days shall be a hundred and twenty years."
This is talking about God allowing mankind to continue
living, doing "their own thing" for another 120 years, and then
JUDGMENT would come upon them, if they did not repent of their
wickedness. The "ark" of Noah is not mentioned here. It is not
till later verses AFTER God once more looked upon mankind and saw
their violence that God turned to Noah (who remained faithful to
the Lord) and told him He would destroy the evil doers, but save
him and his wife and three sons and their wives. Then Noah was
told to build the ark.
Ralph Woodrow has correctly seen that 120 years before the
flood Noah was 480 years old, for at the time of the flood
Genesis tells us Noah was 600 year old - see chapter 7:11. The
sons of Noah had not yet been born. They were born when Noah was
500 years old (Gen.5:32). It was AFTER his sons were born and
married that Noah was told to build the ark. Look what Genesis
6:14-18 says, "Make you an ark ... I do bring a flood of waters
... and you shall come into the ark, you, and your sons, and your
wife, and your sons' wives with you."
It should now be clear from putting these verses together
that Noah was NOT working on building the ark for 120 years. We
really have no teaching from the Bible any more than this. We
just do not know have long it took Noah to build the ark.
NO RAIN BEFORE THE FLOOD?
The Bible passage used which supposedly supports this idea
is Genesis 2:4,5.
"These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth
when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made the
earth and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it was
in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the
Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was
not a man to till the ground..."
I have heard this "no rain before the flood" teaching, MANY
times over the last 40 years. It is so used that it is taught
by many as something the Bible is quite certain and dogmatic
about. Many are certain that no rain fell before Noah's flood,
which they say would have made Noah the greatest laughing joke on
the earth, and especially as he was building this wooden ship for
120 years. The people believing and teaching this "no rain"
before Noah doctrine, say that the earth was covered with a type
of water vapor, I guess something like the heavy humidity that is
in Florida, but even more so, because Florida does get rain.
Maybe they think it was a really wet due every night. But
whatever they think the climate of the earth was like before
Noah's flood, they believe Genesis 2:4,5 is teaching that there
was no rain until it started to rain at Noah's flood time.
But a careful reading of this verse says no such thing. God
created the plants before they were in the earth, that is, before
they were seeded. They were created full grown and mature. And
they were created full grown because there was TILL THEN no rain
upon the earth. God did not create the seeds first and have them
grow up through the action of rain and sun. He created them full
grown plants before it had rained and before man was created.
This was done on the THIRD day (Gen.1:9-13). Yet on the 6th day
mankind was created.
All this passage says is that up to the creating of mature
plants and trees, it had not rained.
The Bible does not say when it first rained, but to try and
use this passage in Genesis 2 as teaching it did not rain until
the time of Noah's flood, is to me, reading into a few verses
things that are not meant to be read into them.
And another teaching that has often been a part of all the
story telling of Noah's ark is that Noah preached for 120 years
to others to come on board and save themselves. Noah we are told
in the New Testament was a preacher of righteousness, but there
is not one word in either the Old or New Testament that he
preached to others to save themselves by joining him on the ark.
God told Noah that it was he and his wife and his sons and their
wives that had been shown grace to be saved from death, but God
told Noah that He would destroy all the other wicked people, that
and "end" to them was coming (Gen.6:9-13). We are told that God
saw that all others on the "erets" - earth - land - had corrupted
their ways (verse 12). We are given no suggestion that with
Noah's preaching (by word or life) ANY would REPENT. There is
nothing in the Bible to suggest that Noah tried to persuade
others to come on board the ark and save themselves.
WERE ALL PEOPLE EVERYWHERE ON THE PLANET DESTROYED?
The writers of the Bible sometimes wrote in a way that would
make THEIR hub of the world seem like the WHOLE world. Certainly
we can know from the Bible that God worked with people that were
in a particular AREA of the MAIN HUB of a certain progressive
population of the planet. The part of the planet we know and call
as "The Middle East."
The Gospel of Luke chapter two, verse one, is a fine
example. What was happening in the Roman Empire in Palestine,
concerning "enrollment" (Margin of the KJV Bible), is written as
if ALL THE WORLD should be enrolled. So when Peter wrote in
1 Peter 3:20, "few, that is, eight souls were saved" in the
ark," it could be assumed he meant only 8 lives were saved from
off the entire planet, but it may have meant that in the context
of the "erets" or land, that Noah lived in, there were only 8
human lives saved from destruction from the flood of Noah's time.
Peter was possibly NOT trying to teach that Noah's flood
destroyed every single human life from the entire planet earth,
with only 8 person escaping that destruction with their lives.
If the flood was regional and not world-wide, though it
covered a very vast area, it then would not have killed people
thousands of miles away from the land where Noah lived.
The Indians in Canada have a recorded history that goes back
10,000 years. Now either the famous chronology of Usher is
completely way off the mark of true chronology, or Noah's flood
was no where near in the century B.C. where it is usually placed
(according to Usher's chronology, which would still mean Usher
was incorrect). Or, it would mean the Indians of North America
were not in the least effected by Noah's flood. Oh, they may have
"stories" about it in their history, but nearly all people have
stories of super magnitude from other parts of the world, in
their history telling. Huge physical tragedies on the earth do
have a way of getting around and becoming stories related in a
nation’s history files, passed on from generation to generation.
The Bible is not a history book on all parts of the planet
earth, and the nations of peoples in various parts of this globe,
but is mainly focussed on the area of the Middle East.
Yet people have been taught by many well meaning and sincere
Christian writers and leaders that the New Testament and Jesus
Himself, were very dogmatic about "the truth" that ALL persons
except 8, on the entire planet were destroyed. The writers of the
book "The Genesis Flood" present the proof for this teaching in
saying that Jesus taught this was true in the passage found in
Luke 17:26-30.
But as Woodrow in his book on this subject has correctly
stated,"When we turn to this passage, however, it is far from
conclusive that "all" means all people throughout the
entire world."
The verse reads: "In the days of Noe...they did eat, they
drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the
day that Noe entered into the ark, and the flood came, and
destroyed them ALL. Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot;
they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted,
they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it
rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them
ALL"(Luke 17:26-30).
Ah, did you notice it? Did you see that Jesus used the word
"all" in both Noah's flood and in the day that Lot went out from
Sodom. In Lot's situation, the "all" we know did not mean ALL on
the ENTIRE planet, for the fire from the Lord that came only
destroyed the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. "The Lord rained upon
Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire ... he overthrew those
cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities"
(Genesis 19:24,25). Obviously this "all" did not include the town
Lot fled to, or the other cities and people in the Middle East,
or in China, or the Indian people in North America.
This verse and these words by Jesus have a CONTEXT, and the
"all" is used WITHIN a CONTEXT of the thought Jesus was relating
to His listeners.
A newspaper headline may read: "Flight 103 has Crashed - ALL
are Dead!" The "all" here does not mean all people on the planet,
and we do not take it to so mean. We all know the "all" is used
within a certain CONTEXT.
We must all (pun on all is intended) be careful how we read
"all" as used in the Bible or other literature. The "all" for
Lot's time had a context of not being all people on the planet,
and Jesus used Noah's "all" in the same breath, without any
qualifying words to clearly tell us that Noah's time meant all
people on the whole planet, while Lot's destruction did not.
All then destroyed by the Noah's flood could very well be
the all on the "erets" - land - area where Noah and the hub of
the world of people God was dealing with, was located, and not
anything to do with the Indians of North America.
I must agree with Ralph Woodrow's examination of verses that
use "world" in connection with the flood; i.e. Hebrews 11:7 and 2
Peter 2:5. The Greek word is "kosmos" and Woodrow gives the
meaning from Strong's Concordance (#2889); "arrangement, i.e.,
decoration, and by implication the world (in a wide or narrow
sense)."
I believe as does Woodrow that in the case of Noah's flood,
it is best to understand this Greek word in a narrow sense - not
the entire world. There is a "figure of speech" often used in the
known as "synecdoche," - a whole is used for a part, and a part
for a whole (Bullinger's book "Figures of Speech in the Bible"
explains it all in detail) and so even words like "all" can be
used in a limited sense. I have already given you "all the world
was taxed" (Luke 2:1). Another would be Acts 2:5, "men out of
every nation under heaven" assembled on the day of the feast of
Pentecost. This surely did not include the Indians from North
America, or the native people of Japan.
NOAH A MISSIONARY TO AMERICA?
We learn from 2 Peter 2:5 that Noah was a "preacher of
righteousness" - if that means he was preaching the ways and
judgment of God to come, then did Noah travel to the American
continent to preach the way of the Lord and His destructive
judgment to come, if we suppose the flood was going to be
world-wide? I really do not think many believe Noah travelled
outside his land.
And we do know, if we stay with Usher's chronology for the
creation of mankind, that people were living in China, India, and
North America before the time of Noah's flood, according to
Usher's chronology. I have already said that the Indians in
Canada have a history that goes back 10,000 years, a history way
before Noah' flood, if you stick with how Usher tried to figure
Bible chronology.
And this is one reason to me, as to why God did it this way.
He could have decided to destroy them a hundred different ways.
Noah was to be a witness to them, a preacher of righteousness and
a witness that destruction was coming to his civilization for its
great sins. This was the hub of the world at Noah's time, and
that hub of people had sinned mightily, but some other tribes in
other parts of the world had probably not degenerated in sins as
Noah's society. There is in Scripture no reference to Noah ever
having travelled to distant lands to preach destruction to them
for their great sins. A regional flood would be best fitted for
this context of Noah preaching of righteousness and sin.
As Woodrow says, some who believe in the local flood, say it
was in one sense universal, in that all mankind did perish,
because all mankind was still in that part of the earth. But
today the facts are in, and unless you are closing your eyes and
refusing to admit the facts that have been clearly found, mankind
had wandered to distant lands, including North America.
As stated before, the Canadian Indians have a recorded
history that goes back 10,000 years. This was all brought out in
the large series of documentaries called "A People's History" -
about the history of Canada. Painstaking research was done for
MANY YEARS before this series was produced and aired on
Canadian TV.
Was Noah's flood BEFORE 10,000 B.C.? I doubt there is a
fundamental scholar that would be so daring as to claim it was.
A local flood would solve all these chronology questions.
Ralph Woodrow points out some of the passages written by the
Jewish Pharisee historian of the first century - Josephus. They
indicate he did not believe every person on the planet perished
in Noah's flood. It is worth recording those passages here.
Josephus writes concerning the words of Nicolaus of Demascus:
"There is a great mountain in Armenia ... upon which it is
reported that many who fled at the time of the Deluge were saved;
and that one who was carried in an ark came on shore upon the top
of it; and that the remains of the timber were a great while
preserved. This might be the man about whom Moses the legislator
of the Jews wrote" (Antiquities of the Jews - 1957 edition, 1,
3:6).
Josephus goes on to say:
"Now the sons of Noah were three ... these first of all descended
from the mountains into the plains, and fixed their habitation
there; and persuaded others who were greatly afraid of the lower
grounds on account of the flood, and so were very loth to come
down from the higher places, to venture to follow their examples.
Now the plain in which they first dwelt was called Shinar."
(Ibid., 1, 4:1).
Who might have been those others who were persuaded to come
down from the high places?
Woodrow takes us back to Genesis 4 and 5.
EVIDENCE MOST HAVE NEVER NOTICED!
In the fourth and fifth chapters of Genesis two family lines
are mentioned descending from Adam, the line of which Noah was
part, the other line being Adam, Enoch, etc. and Lamech and his
three sons - Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal-cain.
Most universal flood teachers would say all these were
destroyed in the flood, that is both lines, except Noah of course
and his three sons, were killed in the flood. As Woodrow points
out, that gives us a problem, for Moses who wrote Genesis speaks
of descendants of Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal-cain, as STILL LIVING
when he wrote Genesis.
Note it: Genesis 4:20-22.
"Jabal ... was the father of such as DWELL in tents, and of such
as HAVE cattle. And his brother's name was Jubal: he was the
father of all such as HANDLE the harp and organ. And...
Tubal-cain, an instructor of every artificer in brass and iron
(Genesis 4:20-22).
Did you notice it? The writer says "DWELL" not "dwelled" and
they "HAVE" not "had" cattle. They "HANDLE" the harp not
"handled"
If they had all been killed in the flood, this tense of the
words used would be incorrect!
Woodrow then gives two quotes, one form the INTERPRETERS
BIBLE which say they were "nomads, musicians, and metal workers
existing at the time of writing." and HASTING'S ENCYCLOPEDIA OF
RELIGION AND ETHICS, which states, "...this wording implies 'an
unbroken history of civilization' and that the writer of this
section did not, obviously, regard the flood as 'a universal
Deluge.'"
Were some of these descendants of this line of people, the
Indians of Canada and North America that claim they have been in
North America for at least 10,000 years? Or people closer to
home as when Moses wrote all this, but knowing that some people
in a different area of the known world at the time, had indeed
not been effected by the flood of Noah's day. From the tense of
the words he used it would indeed imply this was the case.
Genesis 10 tells us how the descendants of Shem, Ham, and
Japheth divided and migrated. or as the Hebrew word used for
"divided" can mean - "dispersed" (Strong's concordance #6504).
Woodrow's thoughts are that the descendants of the three
sons of Noah were dispersed among other nations that were not
effected by the flood. It certainly is food for thought when we
take everything else we have seen into consideration.
There are those who believe that there are great problems
with trying to claim all peoples of the earth descended from
Noah's three sons. One of those problems Ralph Woodrow brings out
in his study is the huge population of some parts of the earth
and its cities, in a very relatively short span of time after
Noah's flood.
LARGE POPULATIONS?
According to Genesis 10:8-12 we have only three generations
to a mighty area of the world by Nimrod.
A few generations later we have Abraham travelling among
large populations and well developed nations of people. We can
see from Genesis 15:19-21 that Canaan was populated by many
tribes of people. Woodrow points out that 26 cities in Canaan are
mentioned in Genesis at this time in history. He then talks about
what Genesis 12:15 tells us about Egypt and Genesis 14:1-16 about
certain kinds who had captured Lot.
Woodrow calculated for us the time from Shem becoming a
father in Genesis 11 to the time Terah, the father of Abraham,
and it adds up to 222 years.
No one is completely sure how old Terah was when Abraham was
born, but even allowing 75 years or so, say a total of 300 years,
from Noah's flood to the birth of Abraham, that time span can
hardly allow for the great nations and cities that we find in
existence at Abraham's time.
Let's say Shem, Ham, and Japheth each had 76 children
between them, that gives us 76 people on earth, plus Shem, Ham,
and Japheth and their wives (6 of them) - a total of 82 people on
earth for one generation. But pairs for reproduction would be 38
pairs, rounding it off. Say those 38 pairs all had 30 children
(being very generous here for sure), that gives us 1,140 people
plus the 76, and if Shem, Ham, and Japheth and their wives were
still alive, we can add them in also. But let's just take the
1,140 - that gives is 570 pairs for reproduction. If they all had
30 children we would have 17,100 people plus the 1,140, plus the
76, plus the 6, if still all alive back to just after Noah's
flood.
We could go on like this for a few more generations until
Abraham was born.
Not that many people on earth by the time of Abraham, and I
have been very generous I would say with how many children each
couple had, and I did not include some children dying as
children, or from death in other ways.
The way Genesis reads at the time of Abraham the population
of even just that part of the world reads like a MUCH LARGER
population than could EVER have come from just 8 people left
alive on Noah's ark.
But the universal flood advocates are at this point very
willing to agree that the chronology in the Bible and that used
by Usher as about 400 B.C. for the creation of mankind, is
FLAWED, or just is not what we should understand as it seems to
read.
WHEN WAS NOAH'S FLOOD?
As Woodrow says the writers of "The Genesis Flood" book
suggest there may be "gaps of an undetermined length in the
patriarchal genealogy of Genesis."
They would claim the flood of Noah's time was many centuries
before what appears in the chronology of Genesis. Some hold to an
Hebrew way of saying things, that saying "son of" or "so in so
begat" could mean generations are missed out and only certain
names are mentioned. A kind of "short hand" for what otherwise
would be more pages of boring names and lists of chronology.
To use such "gap" chronology here and not think of using it
from Abraham to David or David to Christ, is to say the least
inconsistent and the worst, trying to make your "theology ideas"
fit the Bible as you choose and when you choose.
As Woodrow has said in his book on this subject, "The
regional flood viewpoint, on the other hand, can leave
the years from the flood to Abraham exactly as they are -
without gaps or guesses - allowing that only part of the world's
population was destroyed. This provides a satisfactory
explanation for the existence of developed civilizations only a
few generations after the flood at the time of Abraham."
Yet, some Christian scholars, in the last 100 years or more,
with all these difficulties of a universal Noah's flood teaching,
have come to say and write that Noah's flood was REGIONAL
and not universal or world-wide.
The land that came to be know as Mesopotamia, mainly now
within the country called Iraq, is the largest lowland of the
Middle East, about 45,000 square miles. Some scientists do admit
that there is evidence there to believe at one time a huge
inundation did take place on those plains of Iraq.
Woodrow quotes from HARPER'S BIBLE DICTIONARY and
the old well recognized work of M'CLINTOCK AND STRONG to
add support that it is correct to understand this part of Iraq was covered
with water at some time in the past, and probably that time was the event
of Noah's flood.
There are a number of ways God could have flooded that
Mesopotamia region, as Woodrow points out. With earth upheaval
acting as a dam, or with the command of His voice and will as
water "upright as an heap" (Exodus 15:8).
As the Scriptures say, nothing is impossible with the Lord.
OVERVIEW
With this chapter and the previous ones, it is to me beyond
reasonable doubt to conclude that there was only ONE VIOLENT
UNIVERSAL flood of the entire earth, and that is the one that WAS
OVER AND DONE WITH AS WE ARE BROUGHT ON THE SCENE
IN GENESIS 1:2.
This one universal flood destroyed the age of the world of
the Dinosaurs and the huge vegetation that lived in that age. An
interesting point to note here is that scientists say that some
of the great Dinosaurs had such an appetite that they would have
consumed today's elephant for a mid-morning snack. It was so
violent that even all the sea creatures were destroyed. All upon
the earth at that flood was destroyed, hence God had to create
all that we read about in Genesis chapter one. It was the time
when seams of coal, oil, natural gas, were created by the
violence and pressure. It was the time when diamond seams were
formed. It was the time when through much violence the strata we
often see in rocks, such as evident in the great Canadian
Rockies, was formed. So quick and violent was this flood (that
was upon the earth as Genesis 1:2 tells us) that some mighty
animals of that age have been found preserved in some parts of
the world, still with the grass and vegetation in their mouth,
that they were eating when the violent flood covered them.
What many have tried to attribute to the flood of Noah's
time, was in actual fact done by the violent flood that came upon
the earth through the battle Satan the Devil and his angels had
with the Eternal God and His righteous angels. The scares of this
battle can still be seen on places like the earth's moon and the
planet Mars.
I have covered this battle and that ancient age in other
studies on my Website.
................
TO BE CONTINUED
December 2004
Noah's Flood - Universal? #5
In search of Noah's Ark
Written and compiled
by
Keith Hunt
THE SEARCH FOR NOAH'S ARK
In chapter five of Ralph Woodrow's book on this subject, he
tells us about the now and again stories and rumors and articles
that appear to state that Noah's ark has been sighted or seem up
upon a mountain in Ararat, preserved in the snow and ice. For a
time, when such stories or articles appear, there is another
effort from the religious wing of part of Christendom to beat the
drum of proclaiming the teaching of a world-wide flood, as they
will claim it was world-wide otherwise the ark would not be up on
top a mountain that is about 17,000 feet high.
I well remember as a young child in the 50s one of England's
respected national newspapers came out with photos and the story
of a couple of Russian army planes flying over the mountains of
Ararat, and taking photos of what could have been the wooden ark
partially sticking out of the ice and snow. Wow, it all not only
sounded great but did indeed look like it was so, the photos did
show what could have been the bow or stern of a wooden ship
partially protruding out of the snow and ice near the top of a
mountain in the Ararat chain of mountains.
This story caused a bit of a storm in the religious and none
religious world for a few months, but then it disappeared, it
seems as quickly as it arrived. To this very day, fifty years
later, I've never heard any more about this sighting or the
photos that went with it.
It does certainly make one wonder how accurate such stories
and reports are, or if they are not all made up from the
imaginations of the human mind and passed down as if they were
fact.
Woodrow recalls of his reading a religious tract in 1956, on
the supposed fact of Noah's ark having been seen and found. He
gives the story and I will also reproduce it here also.
The story goes:
It is in the days just before the Russian Revolution that this
story begins. A group of us Russian aviators were stationed at a
lonely temporary air outpost situated about 25 miles northwest of
Mount Ararat. The day was dry and terribly hot, as August days so
often are in this semi-desert land. Even the lizards were
flattened out under the shady side of rocks and twigs. Their
mouths were open and their tongues lashed out as if each panting
breath would be their last. Only occasionally would a tiny wisp
of air rattle the parched vegetation and stir up a chocking
cloudlet of dust. Far up on the side of the mountain we could see
a thunder shower, whilst still farther up we could discern the
white snow-cap of Mount Ararat which has snow all the year round
because of its great height. How we longed for some of that snow!
Then the miracle happened. The captain walked in and announced
that plane number 7 had its new supercharger installed and was
now ready for high altitude tests. He then ordered my buddy and
me to make the test. At last we could make our escape from the
heat, so we lost no time in getting on our parachutes, strapping
on our oxygen cans, and in doing the half-dozen other things
needful before going up. We then climbed into the cockpits, and
with our safety belts fastened, a mechanic gave the prop a flick
and yelled, "Contact." In less time than it takes to tell it, we
were in the air! No need to warm an engine when the sun had
already made it almost red hot.
We circled the field several times until we hit the 14,000 foot
mark and then stopped climbing for a few minutes to get used to
the altitude. I then gazed upon that beautiful snow-capped peak
just a little above us and, for some reason I can't explain,
turned and headed the plane straight towards it. My buddy turned
round and looked at me with question marks in his eyes, but there
was no time to ask questions. After all, 25 miles doesn't mean
much at a hundred miles an hour!
We transversed a couple of miles around the snow-capped dome and
then took a long swift glide down the south side and suddenly
came upon a perfect gem of a lake, blue as a sapphire, but frozen
over on the shady side. Whilst we were circling around, suddenly
my companion yelled and excitedly pointed to the overflow end of
the lake. I looked and nearly fainted. A submarine? No it wasn't,
for it had stubby masts and the top was rounded over with only a
flat catwalk five feet across down the length of it...
We flew as close as safety permitted, and took several circles
around it. We were surprised at the immense size of the thing,
for it was as long as a city block and compared very favorably to
the liners of today. It was grounded on the shore of the lake,
with one-fourth of the rear end under water. It was partly dis-
mantled on one side near the front and on the other side was a
great doorway nearly twenty feet square, with the door gone. This
seemed quite out of proportion to modern ships which seldom have
doors even half that size.
After seeing all we could from the air, we broke all speed
records back to the airport. When we related our find, the
laughter was loud and long. Some accused us of getting drunk on
too much oxygen. The captain, however, was serious. He asked
several questions and said: "Take me up there, I want to look at
it!" We made the trip without incident and returned to the
airport. "What do you make of it?" I asked as we climbed out of
the plane. "Astounding!" he replied. "Do you know what that ship
is?" "No!" I returned. "Ever hear of Noah's ark?" "Yes sir; but I
don't understand what that has to do with that strange thing
14,000 feet up on a mountain top." "That strange craft,"
explained the captain, "is Noah's ark. It has been sitting there
for nearly 5,000 years. Being frozen up for nine or ten months of
the year, it couldn't rot, and has been in cold storage all this
time. You have made the most amazing discovery of the age!"
When the captain sent a report to the Russian government, it
caused considerable interest and the Czar sent out two companies
of special soldiers to climb the mountain. One group of fifty men
attacked one side, whilst a hundred men attacked the other. Two
weeks of hard work were required to chop out a trail along the
cliffs of the lower part of the mountain, and it was nearly a
month before the ark was reached. Complete measurements were
taken, plans were drawn of it and many photographs obtained,
which were all sent to the Czar. The ark was found to contain
hundreds of small rooms, whilst others were large with high
ceilings. The unusually large rooms had a fence of great timbers
as though designed to hold beasts ten times the size of
elephants. Other rooms were lined with tiers of cages, somewhat
like one sees today at a poultry show: only instead of chicken
wire they had rows of tiny iron bars along the front.
Everything was heavily painted with a wax-like material
resembling shellac, whilst the workmanship showed all the signs
of a high type of civilization. The wood used throughout was
oleander, which belongs to the cypress family and never rots.
This, together with the intense cold, accounted for its perfect
preservation. The expedition also found on a peak of the mountain
above the ark, the burned remains of the wood observed to be
missing from the ark. Evidently those timbers were hauled up and
used to build a shrine, for inside was a rough stone altar, such
as the Hebrews used for sacrifices. That timber had either been
struck by lightning, or it had caught alight through a fire from
the altar. The timbers were considerably charred and the roof
burned entirely away.
A few days after the report had been sent to the Czar, that
government was overthrown by the Bolsheviks. Our records were
probably destroyed by a set of men who sought to discredit
religion and all belief in the Bible. Meanwhile, we white
Russians of the air fleet escaped through Armenia. Four of us
eventually reached America, where we could be free to live
according to the good Old Book, which we had seen for ourselves
to be absolutely true, even to so fantastic sounding a thing as a
world flood! - Vladimar Roskovitsky.
End Quote
Woodrow says it is not possible to accurately find when this
story was first brought to public attention but he states that
according to one source, it was primed as early as 1 April 1933
by the Kolnische Illustrierte Zeitung, announcing the discovery
of Noah's ark - as an April Fool's Day joke!
Woodrow quotes from sources that state the story was
elaberated upon from an older story, made more interesting and
readable, and ended up as 95 percent fiction, with a public
apology given on October 17, 1945.
As Woodrow points out there are a number of very
questionable points in this story, but the one concerning the ark
being constructed from OLEANDER is perhaps the most laughable
one. Oleanders grow between 6 and 25 feet high. Such could hardly
provide "timber" for the ark!
Then as Woodrow correctly points out, if this was a real
true story then you could bet your bottom dollar that the
"religious" world, especially from the west, would have arranged
tours and sent "experts" to get up that mountain and ascertain
firsthand the truth of the matter. You need also remember that
though the people of Turkey are mainly Muslim, their Koran book
also mentions Naoh and his ark. It would be just a viable for
them to also prove their Scriptures were correct, as for
Christians to do likewise with their Scriptures.
Another very good point Woodrow brings out is that if the
soldiers were able to climb up the mountain and find the ark with
no apparent trouble (but only the trouble of taking a while to do
it), then surely in our modern world of space technology,
sounding instruments, etc. it would be a relatively easy job to
locate the ark of Noah today, if it is indeed up in the snow and
ice of one of those mountains of Ararat, in Turkey.
This has got to be a serious problem for those who still
claim the ark is there to be seen or found. For in this modern
"space age" with all our sophisticated machines and "James Bond"
type instruments, if the access to Noah's Ark was so simple to
locate, you can bet some "religious zealot" groups would be there
digging it out. But 80 and more years have gone by since this
"fiction story" was proclaimed or put into the context of the
Russia Revolution, and NO proof of having found Noah's Ark on the
mountains of Ararat has been demonstrated or produced for world-
wide TV news channels. And as mentioned, if it really was so, the
tourist industry would be over-run by "Christians" wanting to go
and view it - think of the billions of dollars such a tourist
trip would bring for the country and local people. Some of the
"Christian" TV groups have MILLIONS if not BILLIONS of dollars to
work with. There would be at least one Christian person on this
planet who had millions upon millions of dollars, that would be
more than happy to fund, with space-age equipment, a Christian or
Muslim group who would "go and find" Noah's ark on the mountains
of Ararat, if indeed there had been ANY truth to past stories of
people having seen such a ship frozen up there in the snow and
ice.
Woodrow gives the names of people who have climbed Mount
Ararat from the time of J.Parrot in 1829, who it is thought was
the first man to do so. None of them found any concrete evidence
of a mighty ship frozen up there in the snow and ice.
Not to be surprised, many still today climb Ararat, the
local hotel near the town of Dogubayazit has a busy and lucrative
buisness from would be climbers and searchers for Noah's ark.
The mountain has been searched by helicopters and planes,
photos taken, even from orbiting satellites.
Woodrow tells of R. Bailey ("Where is Noah's Ark?" Abingdom,
1978), giving a detailed account of a fellow called John Libi who
claimed he had a dream that told him of the location of the ark.
Libi repeatedly search Mount Ararat, making his seventh and final
climb in 1969 at age 73. But he never found Noah's ark.
Stories have persisted of someone finding Noah's ark, a
Kurdish farmer in 1948 was one such fellow, but when as Woodrow
explains, A. J. Smith, from a Bible College in North Carolina went
there, he could find no one who knew the story or the man who had
claimed he had seen the ark up on the mountain of Ararat.
Such is the mind-set of "religious zealots" who will do
moves, inside out, upside down, sideways shuffle, back walking,
flip-flops, hand stands, to say Noah's Ark is found on mount
Ararat. To be sure, with our space age technology, you can be
confident that every effort would be made by wealthy Christian
groups to find Noah's ark, on Ararat, if indeed it has been seen
to be there by someone at some times.
ARARAT - DID THE ARK REST THERE?
Again many have mis-read what the bible actually does say.
It says in Genesis 8:4, "And the ark rested...upon the mountains
of Ararat."
Woodrow correctly points out that Ararat was the name of a
country or region. It was the "kingdom of Ararat" (Jeremiah
51:27). The word "Ararat" and "Armenia" are both from the same
Hebrew word, in Strong's Concordance the number is 780. Ararat
could well then be the older form of the region of Armenia.
The ark upon the waters drifted from Mesopotamia into the
region of Ararat and its mountains. Then notice Genesis 8:4 says
the ark rested on the MOUNTAINS - plural - not upon a mountain
called Ararat, but rested on the mountainS of Ararat. The EXACT
mountain is NOT stated!!
For people to pick a mountain that THEY THINK is called
Ararat in the land called Turkey today, could well be the BIGGEST
mistake of their theological mind-set and beliefs. They could
very well be looking in a totally WRONG region of that area of
the planet earth. With that in view it is then no wonder at all
that for the last 200 years NO ONE has found Noah's ark, not even
with space-age technology. If, and it is only an IF .... IF God
did allow the ark to be preserved where it came to rest, then it
could well be at another location quite different and quite far
away from a mountain in Turkey, that most THINK is mount Ararat.
but remember again the words of Genesis 8:4 - the ark came to
rest on the mountainS of Ararat, the specific mountain is NOT
named. So even if Ararat is that area of Turkey, then NO specific
mountain in the mountains of Ararat is mentioned as the one on
which the ark came to rest.
Woodrow points out that it was WAY BACK in the 3rd century
B.C. that it was a man called Berosus that claimed the ark came
to rest on the southern area of Armenia in the KURDISTAN
mountains. So it has not always been thought or taught or
believed that Ararat meant the region of Turkey. When we see
that Ararat and Armenia are taken from the same Hebrew word in
the bible, we can see why some like Berosus in the third century
B.C. held to the view that the ark came to rest in Kurdistan
mountains of Armenia.
The Lamsa version of the Bible, taken from the Syriac
Peshitta (which I have in my personal library) calls the
mountains of Genesis 8:4 "the Kardo mountains." Lamsa has a
footnote that says "a chain of mountains in northern Iraq."
The mountain chain is named from the Kurdish people, who
inhabited them at one time, though later they migrated further
north. At first they lived in a region that is now northern Iraq
across some foothills and mountains that bordered the
Mesopotamia plain.
So many in the east, including the Christians established
there, have viewed in the past, that it was this northern area of
Iraq, as we know it today, that the ark came to rest.
Woodrow gives further proof of this understanding as to
where the ark came to rest by quoting from Hippolytus of the 3rd
century A.D. (Refutation of All Heresies, 10:26), "in the
mountains called Ararat, which are situated in the direction of
the country of the Adiabeni."
Also quoted by Woodrow is Sextus Julius Africanus, a noted
"church father" who also said that the mountains on which the ark
rest are "in Parthia" - which points to the same general direction
as northern Iraq.
The Koran (Hud 11:46) gives the name of the mountain as Judi,
" ... and the ark rested on the mountain Al Judi." A footnote in
some versions, mentions that this mountain is one which divides
Armenia on the south from Mesopotamia. Again the same general
area as where the Kurds once lived.
As Woodrow admits, all these quotes from varies persons in
different centuries, do not all say exactly the same thing. But
it does point out that it is FAR from the truth that everyone at
all times and in all ages, have taught that the mountain the ark
came to rest upon was a mountain called Ararat in the land of
Turkey. Some held to the belief that the ark came to rest much
further south in the area we today would call northern Iraq, a
region that would have bordered on the great Mesopotamia plain.
And that is probably exactly why no one has discovered
Noah's Ark in Turkey, if of course God has preserved it in the
first place, which is in itself highly questionable, seeing that
human nature would probably worship the "creatutre" more than
the CREATOR.
Nevertheless, remember Genesis 8:4 says the ark came to rest
on the mountainS - plural - of Ararat, and no specific mountain
is mentioned.
..............
TO BE CONTINUE
December 2004
Noah's Flood - Universal? #6
In search of Noah's ark continued
NOAH'S FOOD
A RE-VISITED
Part six
Written and Compiled
by
Keith Hunt
I was at Sabbath services (Calgary, Alberta, Canada) this
December 25th 2004. The invited guest speaker from the USA
was talking in part about Noah's Ark. His sincerity I do not
question. He gave us a "hand-out" on what was supposed to be
modern "proof positive" of the "discovered" Noah's ark.
Here below was the hand-out of, please note carefully, a
press-release dated June 11, 2000.
Quote:
PRESS RELEASE
Kherem La Yah Press: Vista, California 92084 USA
For immediate release June 11, 2000
NOAH's ARK and CITY
Two major International expeditions are now forming for
exploration of a recent discovery of Noah's long-lost city of
"Naxuan." Discovered by an independent researcher and author,
David Allen Deal of Vista, California in July of 1997. Deal
utilized a technique called "photogrammetry," studying a Turkish
Air Force aerial mapping photograph taken in 1959 that showed
Noah's Ark remains in a mudflow at the 6,200 foot level. Deal
first discovered the original touchdown point, 2 kilometres
farther up the mudflow from the ark which had, in the distant
past, slid down to a 1,200 foot lower elevation. It was by
enlarging this military, high-resolution photograph 20 times that
the building foundations and graves began to become visible. Deal
immediately notified Professor M. Salih Bayraktutan of Noah's Ark
High Commission in Turkey which set all the recent research into
motion.
Deal and several others from a newly-formed research project
based at Ataturk University in Erzurum, called SEPDAC (Search for
Early Post-Diluvial Anatolian Cultures) travelled to the site in
1998 and again in 1999 to confirm the discovery. This team
included Dr. Bayraktutan and Professor Robert Michelson of
Georgia Tech. Indeed, ancient cultural remains and house
foundations were identified adjacent to the Iranian border near
Dogubavazit, Turkey, in the mountains that lie just south of Mt.
Ararat at 7,400 feet above sealevel.
Three human ribs were removed from one of millions of graves
there, which are now awaiting radiometric dating to confirm age.
This ancient lost-city had been the first center of civilization
and later became a necropolis for the entire ancient world. The
second city called "Seron" by Armenian historian, Moses of
Chronensis, "the first city of dispersion" was also identified in
1997 by Deal, near the Ark's last resting place. Dr. Ekrem
Akurgal of Izmir, a noted archaeologist of high repute in Turkey,
after being informed via e-mail by Deal last April of his
recently confirmed discovery, became interested in the site and
is presently mounting an international expedition of some 60
archaeologists and amateur-archaeologists from around the world,
including Japan and the United States. This scientific effort is
set for June 23-26 of this year. The expedition is planning
sub-surface studies and possible excavation of the Ark of Noah, a
538-foot-long earthen-mold of the now-long-decayed ship. Work on
Naxuan is also planned to confirm the site.
It has also been announced that Bayraktutan will conduct his own
study this July with a 10-man team of American experts, through a
Press Release (Dogan News Agency, Erzurum). This archaeological
expedition is intended to demonstrate to the world that the
ancient city of Noah, recently discovered by Mr. Deal, actually
exists and has been tentatively confirmed by satellite imagery.
The Ark of Noah impression lies close-at-hand in the Tendruck
mountains of eastern Turkey. This site, Naxuan (meaning Noah's
capitol) is probably one of the singular most important
archaeological discoveries of all time.
http://www.noahsark-naxuan.com/5.htm 11/14/00
End quote
Now did you notice that certain remains of humans were to be
specially dated with radiometric dating. Now this was way back in
2000 when the press release was sent out. Have you HEARD ANYTHING
in any serious way about the "dates" of these supposed humans,
that obviously the press release is wanting you to believe these
human remains were back in Noah's day, or they would hope were
very close to whatever they believe was the time of Noah and
shortly after.
I have heard NOTHING in religious circles or world news to
support that this find (if it is true at all, in the first place,
and I will say more of "truth" reporting shortly) as being proved
to be of humans at or close to the time of Noah.
[AS I ENTER THIS TODAY 2020, NOTHING HAS EVER
BEEN DISCOVERED AS TO NOAH’S ARK— THE CHRISTIAN
WORLD HAS BEEN SILENT ON THIS SUBJECT. AND SILENT
HERE TELLS YOU A WHOLE LOTM- Keith Hunt]
Did you notice the claim is that Noah's ark "slid down"
1,200 feet. Where on earth is the proof of that statement, which
they would like you to accept as fact?
The press release gives some photos that you are to accept
as being the "shape" and "size" of Noah's ark. both ends are
pointed, one more than the other. If I had been given these
photos WITHOUT first being told they were photos of Noah' ark, I
WOULD NEVER HAVE THOUGHT they were land impressions
of Noah's Ark. We do not even KNOW if Noah's ark was pointed
at the bow or stern. The Bible gives us NO clue as to the shape of
the ark at the front or the end of it. It was to FLOAT, and hence not
intended to move from one specific point on earth to another far
distant point, or have to navigate in any particular direction.
So, there was no need for Noah to have to build the ark in any
"pointed" shape, either in the front or the back.
Again, if the photos were shown to you WITHOUT anyone
telling you they were photos of Noah' Ark, there is nothing in
them to immediately justify you believing this is a land
impression left by the Ark of Noah. But once that notion is in
the mind, it is easy for the mind to go out looking for a shape
in the ground, on the mountains of Ararat, and when anything
close to that "mind's view" (coupled with a certain "theological"
view) is seen, it is not far for the mind to jump to a conclusion
that yes, you have found the shape of Noah's ark in the mud of
some mountain in the Ararat chain of mountains.
And did you NOTICE, that certain people (with fancy sounding
titles) were to go to this sure Noah's Ark find land impression
spot ... IN THE YEAR 2000!! The whole story goes back to 1997,
and even way before, a photo given as taken in 1948 of this
supposed ground shape of Noah's Ark (and they admit it is only
ground shape, for as admitted, the Ark has long since decayed.
I HAVE HEARD NOTHING from any of these distinguished
scientists, or from any serious religious source, or any
trustworthy world news-casts, or reporters, that what they went
to discover in 2000 did indeed turn out to be Noah's Ark, with
concrete proof backing it all up. AND ALL THIS HAS BEEN FIVE
YEARS AGO, very near!!!
[STILL TRUE TODAY OIN 2020 - Keith Hunt]
The size of the ark is given as 538 feet long. Now this
length up till recently was a good deal longer than what most
Biblical scholars would give as the cubits given in the book of
Genesis. So what did the presenter of this lecture present? He
said that they went to Egypt, from where Moses was (who wrote the
book of Genesis) and said they found that in some form in Egypt
at Moses time, a cubit could have been 25 inches in length, hence
right on the button for this ground impression in the mud. The
same for the width.
I have already presented to you that facts really are that
nobody knows the exact length in inches of the cubit in Moses
age, and certainly not Noah's age.
Do "religious" people at times make up stories, and report
them, publish them, as IF IT IS REALLY SOLID FACT, the REAL
TRUTH OF THE MATTER?
Sorry to say to you that INDEED THEY DO, at times, in SOME
circles of the Bible believing world.
About 20 years ago, in the 80s, it was reported by some AS
FACT, that the stones to build the end-time temple in Jerusalem,
were cut and standing in a USA shipping dock, ready to be shipped
over to Israel, so the Jerusalem Temple could be built. The WHOLE
THING WAS A PACK OF LIES!! There NEVER HAD BEEN any
stones cut or moved to a dock on the USA to be shipped over to the
land of Israel, to build ANYTHING, let alone a Temple in Jerusalem.
We are now just ready to turn the corner into 2005, and
nearly FIVE years has gone by since this press-release. It is sad
to say that I must take all this as either another failed attempt
to find Noah's ark, or worst still, as a complete fabrication and
outright deception and plain lies.
If anyone out there can present to me the concrete factual
proof that this last effort from 1997 to the present HAS INDEED
come home with historical and physical facts that this shape in
the mud and rocks is indeed the impression left by the resting
Ark of Noah on a mountain in Ararat, Turkey, then I'm willing to
listen. But you better have mighty strong proof, to show me that
Noah's Ark was pointed at both ends, and was indeed 538 feet in
length. As well as answer the other arguments present here in
favor of a REGIONAL flood and NOT a world-wide flood.
Now I'll get back to more presentations from the last
chapter on Noah's Flood by Ralph Woodrow in his book on the
subject.
He relates how it was not until the fourth century A.D. that
Mount Ararat (called Mount Massis by the Armenians and Agri-Dagi
by the Turks) became deemed as the resting place for Noah's Ark.
And he says that "Christianity Today" once quoted the renowned
archaeologist Dr.William F. Albright as saying that there is NO
Biblical basis for the claim that Mount Ararat is where the Ark
settled.
Woodrow correctly points out that the word translated
"mountain" in the Bible does not automatically mean a mountain of
great height, for the same Hebrew word is often translated
"hill." It is number 2022 in Strong's Concordance of the Bible.
It simply means an "elevation" with no automatic built in "super
high" anything.
We are simply not given the height of the mountain on which
the Ark came to rest. It would seem God did not think it
important enough to mention, hence the idea that the flood waters
covered Mount Everest is just not included in the relating of the
events by Moses when he wrote the first five books of the Bible.
Woodrow points out that Mount Ararat does have some very
unpleasant nature and weather high up towards its top. He asks
the question of how thousands of tiny and large animals (some
just not made for climbing down such a rugged and hostile climate
as found up on Mount Ararat. Of course the common answer from
Christian world-wide flood advocates would be that Ararat was not
rugged or did not have such a harsh climate, when the animals and
creeping things came out from the Ark, or, that God worked a
miracle and suspended the harsh climate and made sure the pair of
spiders etc. managed to make it down and reproduce without dying
in the attempt to repopulated the world with millions of spiders.
Again the argument would be that the snow and ice from the
14,000 foot level and up on Ararat did not exist at that time of
Noah, and it has all come to be with climate changes since the
time after Noah. Against such an argument there is really no
answer, yet at the same time those who would hold such an
argument cannot prove their argument either.
Why did Noah send out a dove to test how the waters were
abating? If he was high up over the top of Ararat, which is about
17,000 feet, surely he had a "bird's eye view" of how the waters
were abating from off the planet.
Then again the dove bringing back an olive leave .... well
olives trees grow at a much lower level than anywhere near the
height of Ararat. So by the time the dove brought back the olive
leave Noah should have had a great view of the mountains around
him.
And how did the olive tree manage to grow so quickly after
the earth had been covered with water above Everest for about a
year. Even supposing the argument that such great mountains like
Everest did not exist at Noah's time, it still makes for a
miracle like event for an olive tree to have grown so quickly,
but I guess with God nothing is impossible, if He really did want
vegetation to spring back to life overnight so to speak, He could
command it and it would be done.
From the Genesis account, if Noah was high above Everest or
Ararat (supposing Ararat was the highest mountain on earth at
that time), then the waters abated down to where olive trees were
growing in SEVEN days. Of course "the miracle" answer answers it
all as some would have it.
As Woodrow has said in his book, there are MANY difficulties
concerning Noah's flood, if we hold that it was a world-wide
flood, but many if not most of these difficulties are cleared up
when we hold to the thought of a "local or regional" flood.
Many of the well-known Bible Commentaries and Bible
Encyclopedias have long ago abandoned the idea and thought of a
world-wide Noah's flood.
When I take all things into consideration I also must agree
that Noah's flood was probably a REGIONAL flood and not a flood
that covered the whole planet earth.
THERE WAS A UNIVERSAL FLOOD!!
But it was NOT at Noah's time!
The Bible teaches that the earth was created beautiful and
not is chaos, the angels sang for joy at the wonderful created
earth. When we are brought on the scene in Genesis 1:1-2 the
earth is covered with water, and there is no life whatsoever,
either in the waters or the land under the waters.
There was a world of Dinosaurs - they covered the earth.
There were great and mighty flying creatures in that world. There
was great and mighty sea creatures in that world. There were
great and mighty plant, trees, shrubs. That world was wiped out
SUDDENLY and with MIGHTY force!!
There was a time in the distant past when there was a WAR in
the heavens and at least in our near solar system. Satan and his
angels fought against God and His angels. The scares of this
battle are clearly seen on the moon and places like Mars. Jesus
tells us in the Gospels that He saw Satan fall from heaven as
like lightening. He and his angels who became demons, were cast
down. They were allowed by God to DESTROY AND BRING HAVOC
on this earth, so violent and sudden it was that the whole world of the
Dinosaurs was destroyed, some covered so quickly with the chaos
of water and mud, that they were preserved whole and in some
cases with the food they were eating in their mouths and
stomachs.
It was the time of violence so mighty that whole coal bed
seams were created, as well as oil, natural gas, and other rich
deposits such as diamonds were created.
The strata we see in the huge Canadian Rockies and other
great mountain ranges of the world were formed, and when God
brought the dry land from the seas, in Genesis one, we see the
strata in many open face mighty rock mountains of today.
Geology shows there was a violent world-wide earth upheaval.
The Bible shows all was covered with water and from that
life-less planet God created what we read about in Genesis
chapters one and two.
God allowed this destruction to come upon what was created
beautiful, for from it He would create His master-piece of
creation. He would create a world for the human kind to live, who
He designed in the form of Himself, to became like Himself, to
share in the God life of existence. He now desired to have
children born to Himself. This plan a reproducing Himself and so
the whole plan of salvation for the mortal human kind, is fully
expounded upon on my Website.
Yes, some huge creatures were created with mankind,
creatures now extinct, which were very similar to some Dinosaurs
of the previous age. The one mentioned in the book of Job can
hardly be thought of as any being that lives in the land and seas
today. Hence some human footprints found with Dinosaur type
footprints in some strata.
We have some creatures preserved from the Dinosaur age that
would have been like those of our humankind age.
God is able, if He wishes to create the same type of
creature in ANY age, the age before man and the age after man.
PLEASE NOTE
The belief that Noah's flood was universal or regional is
NOT a test of salvation. Which ever way you want to believe about
the story of Noah as to the size of the flood, is not a salvation
issue. We do know that Noah is said to have been a preacher of
RIGHTEOUSNESS, - he served and obeyed the ways of the true God of
heaven above. He was SAVED by God's GRACE, and will be in that
resurrection of the saints, upon the return of Jesus Christ to
this earth.
THAT is the MAIN point of the story of Noah. RIGHTEOUSNESS
will LIVE, sin and unrighteousness will DIE. So is the plan of
God.
Keith Hunt
...............
Entered on my website January 2005
No comments:
Post a Comment