Noah ark and Tomb in Armenia?

[Adventist Heretic]

I recently ran across a article by a Bill Shea in Diolague magazine. He claims to have found the tombs on shem ham, jeapth and Noah and theirs wives in armenia. It is commonly refered to as the Armenian Stonehenge. It is pretty amazaing. There are 3 sites. The have characters that are consistant with the root characters of both acient phonecian and hebrew. and can be deciphered by someone who understand those languages and there roots.

the stones tell us that the Ark was taken apart and buried with Noah in his tomb (it is a pretty big site) so as to preserve it for future generations. 2of the sites are in southern Armenia and are also pretty hard to miss. Armenia has been in Communist hands up until recently so it has been pretty hard to reach . If I can find a scanner and the quality is good I will input it and post it here

 

[tall73]

I think this is the article you mean

http://dialogue.adventist.org/articles/17_3_shea_e.htm

 

[thereselittleflower]

And to think, I was in Armenia once looking at Mt Ararat wondering if Noah's Ark was on the mountain!


Peace

 

[Yeznik]

And to think, I was in Armenia once looking at Mt Ararat wondering if Noah's Ark was on the mountain!


Peace

LUCKY YOU!!!!!!

All biblical and historical evidence points to Noah landing in Armenia. Noah is also sometimes called the Grand Father of the Armenians. The Armenians can trace there ancestors all the way back to Japeth.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

To clarify. Noah's Landing site has not been found.
But it look like his tombs might have been found. There are 2 theories as to the landing site based on this info.

The Ark according to the stones on and around the tomb site seem to indicate that the ark was taken apart and buried in the tomb of Noah. That location is 30 miles NE of the traditional Mt Ararat, still in the mountains of Ararat. as described in the bible.

As to the actual location of the ark.
1. One theory is that the ark actually landed near the Tombs. and was then disassembled.

2. The other says that that the landing is at the location called the Durnpir site that is is commonly associated with Ron Wyatt. This theory states that Noah landed about 20 miles south of MT Ararat and then after some time migrated to the area near the tombs now in present day Armenia. Near the time of his death. The ark was disassembled and moved to be buried with Noah in a location know to most of the population of the world at that time. a drogue stone, a stone to stabilize the movement of the ark in the flood was carved on to commemorate the site. The Site commonly talked about by Ron Wyatt and the like is really the foot print of the boat and where it landed.

 

[HawkEye777]

I think I'm leaning more on Ron Wyatts descovery, because the way he presents most of the finds with the biblical references makes me think that he read the bible quite a bit. He had references in there that I didnt even realize were there. But not only that, but also the pictures he presents are so plain that they are believeable... to me anyway.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

Update:

Dr. William Shea retruned from Armenia in 2006 after his 3 expedition there in 4 years. He is planning a return trip in a few months. late april, early may. His findings of the first trip
1.(2003)
a. Mt Arragatz possible landing of Ark
b. The tomb of Shem
c. The tomb of Japeth

2. (2004) writting in book,
a. Analysis of the Tomb of Shem
3. (2006)
a. Analysis of the tombs at the shem site and the surronding areas.
b. Analysis of the tombs at the Jepeth site.
c. Analysis of the Arragats site
I will type the the letters (2 in all ) on this site.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

 

[trumpeter]

I think I'm leaning more on Ron Wyatts descovery, because the way he presents most of the finds with the biblical references makes me think that he read the bible quite a bit. He had references in there that I didnt even realize were there. But not only that, but also the pictures he presents are so plain that they are believeable... to me anyway.

Ron Watt is the original source of factual information on Noah's Ark, continue to monitor his site for future information on the Ark of the Covenant. I have the book The Boat-Shaped Object on Doomsday Mountain by his wife Mary Nell Wyatt, I highly recommend it, $20.

 

[JolieHeart]

Exciting discovery

 

[archaeologist]

i have read the links about these tombs and am interested in knowing if there are more articles now with more detailed information. or at least a link to them so i can read what they say.

thanks

 

[sphsjags]

Kool

 

[Maverick3000]

I think I'm leaning more on Ron Wyatts descovery,

Ron Wyatt is also a fraud, and is considered a joke within the profession. Even many Fundamentalists disregard his work now.

Anyways, anyone got sources on this? I sincerely doubt they could make a conclusion that is Noah's tomb so quickly without publishing it.

 

[Saint Matthew]

Ron Wyatt is also a fraud, and is considered a joke within the profession. Even many Fundamentalists disregard his work now.

Anyways, anyone got sources on this? I sincerely doubt they could make a conclusion that is Noah's tomb so quickly without publishing it.

People like ron don't help the cause and that is sad

 

[JohnStevenson]

Ron Wyatt was a self-declared archaeologist who made a large number of unsubstantiated claims. His education was not in archaeology, but in medicine -- he was a nurse. The problem isn't so much his lack of credentials, but his total lack of evidence for any of his outrageous claims. Among other things, he claimed to have discovered...
• Noah's ark.
• The ark of the covenant which had on it samples of the blood of Jesus
• A chariot wheel from Pharaoh's army that crossed the Red Sea
• Sodom and Gomorrah

There has not been a single shred of verifiable evidence for any of these claims. Nothing. One can only conclude that the fellow was a fraud who managed to fool a lot of gullible Christians (no archaeologists ever bought into a single one of his claims).

 

[lostintranslation]

Hi guys.

I'm a bit confused by this. I thought that the Noah story was one of the ones we were supposed to take metaphorically?

I think we make ourselves look really stupid by saying that the Noah story is real and present atheists with a real opportunity to argue that the Bible is just wrong.

After all, it's taken as a given that the flood did not happen in the way that it is suggested in Genesis and to suggest that Noah could collect a stock of every single animal in the world is just ridiculous. Noah was a man...how do you expect him to have collected and preserved lions and wasps and rabbits and hyenas and bluebottles and whales etc. etc.

Surely we'd be better off accepting that the Bible is not a historical document in this case or am I missing something?

 

[marktheblake]

I'm a bit confused by this. I thought that the Noah story was one of the ones we were supposed to take metaphorically?

Good point!. But the Bible doesn't have the word "metaphor" or 'truth" at the start of any of the chapters to indicate how we are supposed to take it.

We do need to pay respect to the writing style and integrity of the author to determine how we are supposed to read and understand it. Take a newspaper, it is not difficult to see the difference between a news story, and a fictional feature article or an editorial.

I think we make ourselves look really stupid by saying that the Noah story is real and present atheists with a real opportunity to argue that the Bible is just wrong.

Its not a topic that should be argued by the uninformed for either side. There has been extensive studies on the topic both for and against and is worth reading if you would like to pursue the topic.

After all, it's taken as a given that the flood did not happen in the way that it is suggested in Genesis

No its not taken as a given, unless you have a alternate theory of how you might think the flood did happen?

and to suggest that Noah could collect a stock of every single animal in the world is just ridiculous.

You are absolutely correct there, and if you can go back and read the scripture you will see that simply was not the case. Noah did not collect a single animal (hint: did you see the movie Evan Almighty?)

Noah was a man...how do you expect him to have collected and preserved lions and wasps and rabbits and hyenas and bluebottles and whales etc. etc.

Great question, we do not know the answers to all of that, God simply did not tell us. He did not tell us how he resurrected Jesus either, but we are told that it happened. Part of your question can be answered by the scripture again - off the top of my head, neither insects and fish were taken aboard the ark. As for the logistics of the operation, John Woodmorappe’s book Noah’s Ark: a Feasibility Study is an excellent resource and you can google this for a lot of brief commentaries and extracts.

Surely we'd be better off accepting that the Bible is not a historical document in this case or am I missing something?

The problem we would have with that, is how do we decide which is truth and which should be chucked out.

 

[archaeologist2]

If you are going to talk about Ron Wyatt, you should refer to him as the 'late'... He died several years ago. As for his 'discoveries, i have on my home computer an article by one of the people who worked with him that basically said he probably suffered from a disease that made him actually believe something that wasn't really there.

I will have to post it later.

As for Shea, I believe he was working off of Gertrude Bell's discovery and notes. She was the first one, that I know of, who made the discovery. Somewhere on the internet are actual drawings of the tombs but i do not remember where and I misplaced my copy.

 

[archaeologist2]

I'm a bit confused by this. I thought that the Noah story was one of the ones we were supposed to take metaphorically?

no you are not to take it metaphorically if you do, you would be calling God a liar.

I think we make ourselves look really stupid by saying that the Noah story is real and present atheists with a real opportunity to argue that the Bible is just wrong.

the preaching of the cross is already considered foolishness by the unbeliever, should we stop preaching that as well? it is better looking foolish for God than smart to men.

After all, it's taken as a given that the flood did not happen in the way that it is suggested in Genesis

no it is NOT taken as a 'given'. only those who do not believe God or refuse to accept what was written think so and those same people rely on physical evidence (or the lack thereof) to draw their conclusions. God did not say to rely on physical evidence He said to rely on faith.

there is so much information and questions that could be posted here to help you reconsider but space is very limited. Hapgood records much evidence for a global flood in his book Path Of The Poles but he doesn't refer to it as such, one just has to look at the evidence he re-records and compare with the Biblical narrative and one will see the that there actually is physical evidence to support a global flood as recorded in Genesis.

and to suggest that Noah could collect a stock of every single animal in the world is just ridiculous.

Noah did not have to stock every animal, only kinds which reduces the number immensely. if you learned anything about genetics you would be able to apply the concept of 'information losing' to the whole scenario and come to a rational, scientific conclusion for the diversity today and the lack of animals noah actually needed to preserve.

Noah was a man...how do you expect him to have collected and preserved lions and wasps and rabbits and hyenas and bluebottles and whales etc. etc.

see above and water animals were not placed in the ark, read the list again to see what God wanted preserved.

Surely we'd be better off accepting that the Bible is not a historical document in this case or am I missing something?

you are missing something and do not apply all the facts to the issue but rely on a limited grasp of the situation. you are also forgetting that the geography was not the same then as now, you are forgetting about genetics, and most importanty you are forgetting about God.

God can do anything so if you dismiss the story because humanistically it doesn't work then you are saying God is not god at all but unable to do as He said in Gen. you might as well throw God and the Bible out the window then and forget about being a christian because you are defeated and have nothing to stand upon.

 

[Adventist Heretic]

i have read the links about these tombs and am interested in knowing if there are more articles now with more detailed information. or at least a link to them so i can read what they say.

thanks

If you go to the article, there is an e-mail address for dr. shea. if you contact him there he might send you his book on his research of the site.