I do know that if their find was ancient wood or even petrified wood, that makes it plausible. On the other hand, if it was merely stone that they found, then it is not! Petrified wood, once organic, becomes mineral by displacement but it still retains the appearance of wood. In other words, the ark of the covenant would still look like the timbers from which it was built.
Is discovering the ark imperative for faith? Not for me! I believe Holy Scripture. Noah built the ark because he had faith - trusting the unseen: "By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house..." (Heb 11:7). Noah had great faith: he had never seen rain, a flood, a rainbow, nor even an ark. He built the ark not even knowing the physics of flotation. How did he do that? He trusted God for knowledge, wisdom, and instruction. The Word told him what to do, and how to do it. That was Jesus - God manifested - who instructed Noah in righteousness.
Noah's nature was Gentile. Indeed he was as Gentile as Jew, even more so! "The Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom" (1 Cor 1:22). Noah didn't need a sign to build the ark, not even a drop of rain. He used logic - the wisdom of what would become the Greeks or Gentile people. God warned him of the flood and Noah believed Him; he didn't need a clap of thunder or anything other than trusting the Lord to build the ark. The construction of that large ship took a great degree of faith. He didn't know what a storm would be but trusted God for salvation from it! (Noah, by faith, "walked" on water with Jesus. His faith was greater than Peter's!)
Noah didn't need evidence. He believed what the Lord told him and obeyed. Likewise, Christians don't need the proof of the ark's existence. Whether it is found or not would never satisfy God's skeptics. If Christians have great faith, they will not need to see the ark. Our faith should be satisfied by the death of Jesus on the cross. Salvation and baptism is what the ark was all about. Noah understood that; why can't we? Noah needed the ark to be saved, Jesus is our Ark, thus, we don't need another ship or even need that one.
The ark took on different forms at different times. Adam's "ark" - the Tree of Life - provided the skin of a sacrificed animal. Abraham's ark was the Ark of the Covenant as God lived with the Hebrews. Moses's ark was a basket carrying him as a baby to salvation from death. Our "ark" is the cross on which all mankind was saved. All arks are from the Tree of Life!
I like to believe that the True Cross was made from the wood of Noah's ark. Even that is not necessary, because it was not the cross which saved mankind, but the Tree of Life who died on that tree! God's Arks are always salvation.
It is not the object which saves, but the Lord behind the ark. Noah was saved by God's Name which is Jesus because "by no other name can anyone be saved" (Acts 4:12). Guess what: that means Noah and his household were saved by the grace of God's own impending death. His faith was greater than ours because he believed in not only what he could not see, but what had yet to happen! Noah's ark (actually God's Ark) is part of the mystery of Christ. Noah knew Jesus firsthand before the Lord was ever called Jesus!
If Noah could trust Jesus without evidence, why can't Christians today? Scripture and secular history are both evidence that Jesus is real, worked miracles, died on the cross, and his body is nowhere to be found because the Lord was resurrected. Why do we need proof of the ark? It has no power anymore than the chunks of wood which kings carried in battle from the "True Cross".
However, some will not be stilled. Gentiles could not be persuaded much better than the Jews. The miracles were for doubting Jews: the appearance of the Holy Ghost and speaking a forgotten language was evidence that even most Jews rejected. The Lord said that the Jews were not convinced by Moses nor the prophets, neither a warning from Hell could convince them (Luke 16:31). Likewise, a big boat from the Holy Mountain will hardly convince anyone if they are not convinced by the Lord's death and resurrection!
Where can we turn to find the ark since people need to find it to satisfy their doubt? We turn to the Bible. I understand the enthusiasm Christians have to say, "Ha ha… we found the ark!" I would like that myself because it would prove the world to be wrong. However, that discovery would not be faith in the Lord but convincing that the Bible is right on that one point. That is not faith! That is belief in the world or trusting what can be seen.
You should now read Genesis chapter eight and nine. After the flood while in the ark, let's elaborate on the sequence of events:
- After the rain stopped the ark the waters began to recede (8:2).
- After 150 days the waters were abated (8:3). ("diminished" from Strong's Dictionary).
- In the seventh month the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. (8:4)
- In the tenth month the waters had receded so as to see the mountain tops. (8:5)
- After another forty days, Noah opened the window and sent out a raven. It flew until the water was dried up from the earth. (8:6-7)
- Either then or later he also sent forth a dove which found no dry land and then returned. (8:8-9)
- After seven more days Noah sent forth another dove. (8:10) That same evening the dove returned with an olive leaf in its mouth. (8:11).
- After seven more days, he sent out another dove which did not return. (8:12)
- After the 601st year of Noah's life, he removed the ark's covering and the earth was dry.(8:13) That was the seventh month on the 27th (8:14).
- Noah began to empty the ark and leave (8:18-19).
- Noah built an altar to the Lord and offered offerings (8:20)
- The sons of Noah and maybe Noah left the ark and spread out into the world (9:19)
- Apparently before they left the area, they made and lived in a tent (9:2).
Starting near the end of salvation sequence above, Noah left the ark. Scripture did not say what happened to the ark if anything at that time. Therefore, we should not imply that Noah tore down the ark and used the wood for anything! He certainly did not build the altar with the wood because altars could not be hewn. Thus, we can be led to believe that the ark, a holy relic, was not destroyed by faithful men. Neither can we presume that Noah lived in the ark at all because scripture says that he was in his tent when he became drunken.
Thus, from scripture, nowhere do we find the ark was destroyed. Some theologians say it must have been. That is not scriptural.
Where did the ark land? Perhaps there are some clues: We know that either the ark rested on the mountains with are now called Ararat or the land now called Armenia with that name on another mountain. Genesis 10:25 says that in Peleg's day the earth was divided. Or it could have been when the earth was broken up at the time of the flood (Gen 7:11). I believe that was the division of the continents (continental drift) from the single land mass at the creation (Gen 1:9).
Why is continental drift important? Ararat is on the edge of a tectonic plate which means it may have drifted as well. Continental rotation is theorized to be around the Mediterranean Sea and Jerusalem was is "the navel of the world". My point is twofold: (1) We don't really know where the ark was set down according to modern geography nor do we even know the coordinates in modern times where Ararat was. On a world map, Ararat could be anywhere within site of it's mountain peaks.
The third event says that the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. There are many mountains in that range. That is somewhere within what is in Armenia or may be even in the Ararat mountain range. In the fourth event, Noah could see the mountain tops. This was from somewhere in Armenia or the mountain range of Ararat.
Ararat has two peaks: Greater Ararat and Lesser Ararat. The Greater is roughly 17,000 feet high and the lesser is 13,000 feet. There are many other mountains in that range of even smaller height (7,000 feet).
Scripture says that Noah saw more than one mountain top (plural). From his vantage point, he surely saw Greater and Lesser Ararat. We do know that the ark rested on some mountain in the Ararats or in the land of Ararat. He was at some greater elevation than sea level, We know that his elevation was less than 13,000 feet providing volcanic activity has not grown the mountains which are big craters. (Perhaps they were the fountains for the water, but that's just imagining).
The discovers of the ark say it was at 13,000 feet elevation. That would mean that it had to be on Greater Ararat. That elevation is not supported by Scripture. Noah saw both Greater and Lesser Ararat. Since Lesser was 13,000 feet high, from the vantage point of the ark, he would have not seen Lesser Ararat if that elevation was true. The ark certainly could have moved to a lower elevation but not to a higher one. God's Laws of fluidics don't work that way!
For instance, olive trees can only live at elevations lower than 3000 feet (Wikipedia). Therefore, it is likely that the ark was higher than that, and that the water had receded where the dove had been to an elevation lower than 3000 feet.
I am a skeptic about finding the ark. I do hope that I am wrong, but according to Scripture, I don't think so! However, hunting the ark is a way take the gospel into the world. As long as it's truthful, hunting the ark seems acceptable. Has the True Ark been found. I don't know but I do know that Jesus is my own Ark! Perhaps later, using fluid flow and the times from the Bible I will calculate the elevation where the real ark rested.
No comments:
Post a Comment