For the last fortnight or so, my social media feeds have been buzzing with news of recent archaeological investigations in a remote area of Turkey: the remains of Noah’s Ark have been found there. Can it really be true? Surely such a discovery would silence the sceptics once and for all!
The site was identified in 1959 (I remember watching a TV documentary about it at least 20 years ago), but only now has the Turkish government permitted any kind of proper investigation. There’s definitely something vaguely boat-shaped high up on a mountainside - although I don’t find the photographs terribly convincing, myself. And “boat-shaped” doesn’t equal “boat”…
Many things in the Bible have been confirmed by archaeologists. The Pool of Bethesda (John 5:2), for example, was long thought to be a product of John’s imagination - until it was excavated in 1964. Now you can go there and count its five colonnades for yourself. But unfortunately Christian archaeology also has a long history of exciting “finds” that turned out on closer inspection to be nothing of the sort. One thinks of reports of chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea - probably not wheels at all, but even if they are, they’re the ‘wrong’ design to be Egyptian chariot wheels. Why does this sort of thing happen? Because those of us who believe the Bible to be fundamentally true want to be able to prove that to the sceptics. And so we see what we want to see, sometimes on the flimsiest of evidence.
And it isn’t just archaeologists The Turin Shroud is claimed by many to be powerful evidence for the historicity of the Resurrection - but scientific confirmation is totally lacking. Radio-carbon dating puts its creation in mediaeval times. But its fans have never accepted this; they maintain that the sample was taken from the wrong part of the cloth (which is known to have been repaired several times). However, there are also issues with the image on the Shroud: one of its forearms is much longer than the other, and the hand lies conveniently over the figure’s private parts. And (for me) the clincher: the eyewitness record in John’s Gospel (John 20:6,7) states that Jesus’ head had been wrapped in a separate piece of cloth. So if the Shroud were genuine, there should be no image of Jesus’ head on it!
Which brings me back to Noah’s Ark. The Genesis account says that Noah was commanded to build an ark.
Not a boat.
Despite all the illustrations in the picture books, an ark isn’t boat-shaped, but box-shaped (like the Ark of the Covenant). So why are we getting so excited over something that’s completely the wrong shape?
I don’t want to be a killjoy, and I’d be happy to be proved wrong. But I fear that the investigators are barking up the wrong tree, and that all this hype is going to leave a lot of people bitterly disappointed. Actually, personally, I don’t think that there’s anything left of the Ark now to find. For according to the story, the first thing that Noah and his family did on leaving the Ark was to offer sacrifices of thanksgiving to God. In a landscape that was totally devastated (and thoroughly saturated), where did they get suitable wood to make a fire? (And they would have needed a ready supply of firewood for all sorts of essential activities, like cooking, as well) I know where I would have got it from - especially since the pitch with which the Ark was coated would help it to burn well…
The site was identified in 1959 (I remember watching a TV documentary about it at least 20 years ago), but only now has the Turkish government permitted any kind of proper investigation. There’s definitely something vaguely boat-shaped high up on a mountainside - although I don’t find the photographs terribly convincing, myself. And “boat-shaped” doesn’t equal “boat”…
Many things in the Bible have been confirmed by archaeologists. The Pool of Bethesda (John 5:2), for example, was long thought to be a product of John’s imagination - until it was excavated in 1964. Now you can go there and count its five colonnades for yourself. But unfortunately Christian archaeology also has a long history of exciting “finds” that turned out on closer inspection to be nothing of the sort. One thinks of reports of chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea - probably not wheels at all, but even if they are, they’re the ‘wrong’ design to be Egyptian chariot wheels. Why does this sort of thing happen? Because those of us who believe the Bible to be fundamentally true want to be able to prove that to the sceptics. And so we see what we want to see, sometimes on the flimsiest of evidence.
And it isn’t just archaeologists The Turin Shroud is claimed by many to be powerful evidence for the historicity of the Resurrection - but scientific confirmation is totally lacking. Radio-carbon dating puts its creation in mediaeval times. But its fans have never accepted this; they maintain that the sample was taken from the wrong part of the cloth (which is known to have been repaired several times). However, there are also issues with the image on the Shroud: one of its forearms is much longer than the other, and the hand lies conveniently over the figure’s private parts. And (for me) the clincher: the eyewitness record in John’s Gospel (John 20:6,7) states that Jesus’ head had been wrapped in a separate piece of cloth. So if the Shroud were genuine, there should be no image of Jesus’ head on it!
Which brings me back to Noah’s Ark. The Genesis account says that Noah was commanded to build an ark.
Not a boat.
Despite all the illustrations in the picture books, an ark isn’t boat-shaped, but box-shaped (like the Ark of the Covenant). So why are we getting so excited over something that’s completely the wrong shape?
I don’t want to be a killjoy, and I’d be happy to be proved wrong. But I fear that the investigators are barking up the wrong tree, and that all this hype is going to leave a lot of people bitterly disappointed. Actually, personally, I don’t think that there’s anything left of the Ark now to find. For according to the story, the first thing that Noah and his family did on leaving the Ark was to offer sacrifices of thanksgiving to God. In a landscape that was totally devastated (and thoroughly saturated), where did they get suitable wood to make a fire? (And they would have needed a ready supply of firewood for all sorts of essential activities, like cooking, as well) I know where I would have got it from - especially since the pitch with which the Ark was coated would help it to burn well…
