Posted on 02/02/2009 11:31:13 AM PST by Ron Jeremy
This summer Price, 57, plans to continue on a journey to prove just that as he joins an expedition to Mount Ararat. His team believes that it is there, in Eastern Turkey, where Noah's Ark remains preserved underneath layers of rubble and ice.
"There's a whole trail of history pointing to it [Mt. Ararat]," Price said in a recent interview. "But in our age, people tend to think it is more of a story like Jack and the Bean Stalk.' Our aim is to show that the Bible is good history."
...... A Kurdish shepherd told them that he had seen the ark, and even climbed on top of it, when he was a boy.
The team hypothesizes that the ark is preserved in several pieces beneath a glacier on the mountain, and every so often the glacier recedes, exposing part of the vessel.
"That's when he saw it as a boy," Price said, adding that they had interviewed the shepherd and could find no reason to distrust him.
The shepherd asked for nothing in return, and agreed to lead Bright to the site where he said he had seen the ark.
....
They found the spot, Price said, but it now is covered by an estimated 60-foot-deep pile of boulders. Price believes the landslide may have resulted from attacks against Kurdish rebels on the mountain, or perhaps from explosives that were set off to cover up the ark.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Have you considered the possibility of dinosaurs living in a prior age? Perhaps the one Peter speaks of here: [2 Peter 3:5-7] for this is unobserved by them willingly, that the heavens were of old, and the earth out of water and through water standing together by the word of God, through which the then world, by water having been deluged, was destroyed; and the present heavens and the earth, by the same word are treasured, for fire being kept to a day of judgment and destruction of the impious men.
He's not speaking here of Noah's flood....it is a prior flood being referenced and this would indicate a prior creation. Compare "The heavens were of old" to "The present heavens". We have the same heavens today that Noah had...the Sun, Moon and the Stars. There weren't any changes to the heavens after Noah's flood.
interesting, thanks
FYI, there is a tradition in the Midrash that there were many floods:
“The deluge in the time of Noah was by no means the only flood with which this earth was visited. The first flood did its work of destruction as far as Jaffé, and the one of Noah’s days extended to Barbary.”
http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/mhl/mhl05.htm
Notice that Peter also refers to it this way: "KJV" [2 Peter 3:5-7] For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
It definitely appears that Peter is speaking of a different time.....before the creation of Genesis.
Stunning stuff, I had no idea. Surprised it never comes up in crevo threads.
"That's when he saw it as a boy," Price said, adding that they had interviewed the shepherd and could find no reason to distrust him.
Yanking his chain, hoping to make money off a return trip with an expedition.
Yup....I think......not too many folks are familiar with this idea....and on the face of it, it seems unlikely because of established tradition. But....stop and think. If The Lord has existed for all time (eternity) why is he just now getting around to making a physical creation (6000 years ago in eternal time is "just now")?
Draw a mental picture if you will......think of an entire universe that has been ruined because of Satan's rebellion [Isaiah 14:12-17]. Imagine the planet Earth awash in this formless mess [Genesis 1:2].
I think one of the major mistranslations in scripture occurs here: [Genesis 1:2] And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.
Here is the Hebrew word that is translated by the KJV as "was" in verse 2: 1961. hayah (haw-yaw) to exist, i.e. be or become, come to pass (always emphatic, and not a mere copula or auxiliary) "Was" should be more correctly interpreted as "became".
You will find this word "hayah" translated properly in [Genesis 19:26] But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became (hayah) a pillar of salt.
When you thus use the past tense (became) it makes more sense and agrees with other related scriptures that show a pre-existence of Satan, his angels and their horrible sin spoken of here by Jude: And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.
What exactly was the Angel's first estate? Was this at the same time as Satan's great sin: [Isaiah 14:12-15]?
Remember.....Satan was already a fallen angel when he met Adam and Eve in the garden [Genesis 3]. And....Satan, evidently was a previous resident: [Ezekiel 28:13-15] Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God; every precious stone was thy covering, the sardius, topaz, and the diamond, the beryl, the onyx, and the jasper, the sapphire, the emerald, and the carbuncle, and gold: the workmanship of thy tabrets and of thy pipes was prepared in thee in the day that thou wast created. Thou art the anointed cherub that covereth; and I have set thee so: thou wast upon the holy mountain of God; thou hast walked up and down in the midst of the stones of fire. Thou wast perfect in thy ways from the day that thou wast created, till iniquity was found in thee.
[Isaiah 45:18] shows that God did not create this Earth in a formless mess.....it became that way: For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else. But yet....the KJV and other translations indicate that it was without form and void.....instead of it.....actually becoming that way after Satan's rebellion!
Food for thought..............
For non-believers, no amount of evidence is enough.
For believers, no evidence is enough.
So what's your evidence for transubstantiation?
And when does the Bible leave mythology behind and begin relating history?
The prior floods did not happen in the “ice age” of the scientists but from the days of ‘Enosh onward.
I read a book one time where some reseacher had a theory that the earth had civislizations just as advanced as we are and every 8-10 million yrs, all life was almost destroyed and started over again from scratch. This may explain some findings, like a shoe print in solid rock.
transubstantion.....when Jesus, who was indeed God, said “THIS IS MY BODY” and then added “do THIS in memory of me” pretty much spells it out as far as I’m concerned!!!!!
And G-d said that there was a Flood in the days of Noach, and that Noach built an Ark. But your co-religionist Ron Jeremy (who doubtless believes just as you do about Transubstantiation) ridicules those who believe that this actually happened and demands scientific "proof."
People who believe in transubstantiation and that the "new testament" is literally true have no business ridiculing people who believe in the Hexameron or Noah's Flood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.