PEx Highlights

FIBA FEATURE: Do We Stand a Chance?

Do we really have a shot to make it through? JPM weighs in on the the odds of Gilas Pilipinas in the FIBA World Cup.

read more

MOVIE REVIEW: The Giver

Very promising, but tries too hard to fit in the mold of the Hunger Games/Divergent series.

read more

PHOTOS: Daquis Bags V-League MVP Plum

Wonder who won the other awards? Check out the Shakey's V-League Awarding gallery here!

read more

UAAP Basketball Power Rankings: Week 7

With wins over UST and DLSU, the past week in UAAP can be summed up in three letters: FEU. Check out this week's power rankings here!

read more

PHOTOS: FEU Tamaraws Claim Top Seed

Mike Tolomia's late-game heroics helped FEU get sole possession of the number 1 seed, after a 74-70 victory over La Salle.

read more

Follow @pinoyexchange on Twitter!

Catch our latest updates on Twitter! Follow us, @pinoyexchange

read more

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 28
  1. #1

    The Ark of Nuh (PBUH) was found exactly where the Holy Qur'an states.

    "And it was said, "O earth, swallow your water, and O sky, withhold [your rain]." And the water subsided, and the matter was accomplished, and the ship came to rest on the [mountain of] Judiyy. And it was said, "Away with the wrongdoing people."
    Surah Hud 11:44


    Ararat:

    Known in Turkey as "Agri Dagh", Mount Ararat represents the Bible's location for Noah's Ark. To be specific and clear, the bible says the following:

    Genesis 8:4 "Then the ark rested ... on the mountains of Ararat." (NKJV)

    Note that the bible does not specifically say, Mount Ararat. However, this being the highest place in the mountains of Ararat lends itself to become the biblical location and thus the area of intense Ark searches by many Christians.

    Judi:

    Known in Turkey as "Cudi Dagh", Mount Judi represents the Qur'an's location for Noah's Ark. First and foremost, be careful when discussing the location of Mount Judi! There is truly a lot of confusion over its location. What I mean is this:

    1) The actual Mount Judi is 200 miles south of Mount Ararat in southern Turkey.
    2) Mount Judi has been mistaken for Mount Ararat and vice versa.
    Actual Mount Judi
    Arabic



    The following is taken from the article by Bill Crouse in Archaeology and Biblical Research,Noah's Ark: Its Final Berth Vol. 5, No. 3. Summer, 1992.

    Map Cudi Dagh is located approximately 200 miles south of Mt. Ararat in southern Turkey almost within eyesight of the Syrian and Iraqi borders.11 The Tigris River flows at its base. The exact co-ordinates are 37 degrees, 21 minutes N., and 42 degrees, 17 minutes E. In literature it has also been called "Mt Judi", "Mt. Cardu", "Mt. Quardu", "the Gordyene mountains", "Gordian mountains", "The Karduchian mountains", "the mountains of the Kurds", and to the Assyrians: "Mt. Nipur ". It is also important to note that at times this mountain has even been called "Mt. Ararat". At about 7000 feet altitude it is not a terribly high mountain, though it is snow-capped most of the year. The current edition of the ENCYCLOPEDIA OF ISLAM lists it as "over 13,000 feet and largely unexplored." We are unsure of the exact altitude, but it seems strange that it would not be noted on our modern aerial navigation map if it were 13,000 feet!

    Map:


    Most modern maps do not show the location of Cudi Dagh. It is, however, located about 25 miles from the Tigris River, just east of the present Turkish city of Gizre and still within the bounds of the Biblical region of Ararat (Urartu).12

    Cudi Dagh overlooks the all-important Mesopotamian plain and is notable for its many archaeological ruins in and around the mountain. There are also many references to it in ancient history.13 Sennacherib (700 B.C.), the Assyrian king, carved rock reliefs of himself on the side of the mountain.14 The Nestorians (a sect of Christianity) built several monasteries around the mountain including one on the summit called "The Cloister of the Ark". It was destroyed by lightning in 766 A.D.15 The Muslims later built a mosque on the site. In 1910, Gertrude Bell explored the area and found a stone structure still at the summit with the shape of a ship called by the locals "Sefinet Nebi Nuh" "The Ship of Noah". Bell also reports that annually on September 14, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Sabians and Yezidis gather on the mountain to commemorate Noah's sacrifice.16 As late as 1949 two Turkish journalists claimed to have seen the Ark on this mountain, a ship 500 feet in length!17

    source: http://www.arksearch.com/najudi.htm





    The Observer (London)
    16 Jan 1994

    'Arkologists' claim to have found Noah's Ark
    By Martin Wroe

    LONDON -- Noah's Ark has been found on the Turkish-Iranian border, 32 kilometres from Mount Ararat, according to the leader of a team of scientists that has been investigating the site for six years.

    The Turkish government is so convinced by the findings that, after years of intransigence, it has designated the site one of special archaeological interest and agreed to its excavation next summer.



    Buried Ark The remote site contains a buried, ship-like object, resting an altitude of 2,300 metres.

    At 170 metres long and 45 metres wide, it conforms almost exactly to the 300 cubit by 50 cubit boat that God told Noah to build, according to Genesis 6 in the Bible.

    On surrounding terrain, the American and Middle Eastern scientists have identified huge stones with holes carved at one end, which they believe are "drogue-stones," dragged behind ships in the ancient world to stabilize them. Radar soundings indicate unusual levels of iron-oxide distribution.

    Salih Bayraktutan, head of geology at Turkey's Ataturk University, estimates the age of the 'vessel' at more than 100,000 years.

    "It is a man-made structure and for sure it is Noah's Ark."

    The site is directly below the mountain of Al Judi, named in the Qur'an as the Ark's resting place. **(Surah Hud 11:44 "And it was said, "O earth, swallow your water, and O sky, withhold [your rain]." And the water subsided, and the matter was accomplished, and the ship came to rest on the [mountain of] Judiyy. And it was said, "Away with the wrongdoing people.")**



    David Fasold, an American shipwreck specialist with no religious affiliation, has led the investigation. He says subsurface radar surveys of the site have produced "very good pictures."



    "The radar imagery at about 25 metres down from the stern is so clear that you can count the floorboards between the walls."



    He believes the team has found the fossilized remains of the upper deck and that the original reed substructure has disappeared.

    But the findings have infuriated the scores of Christian Ark-hunters who travel to Turkey, convinced the Ark will only be found on Mount Ararat.

    Fasold, who calls himself an "Arkologist," also argues that it was not a great flood that pushed the Ark into the mountains. He says it was "an astronomical event causing a tectonic upheaval, a tidal bore causing gravitational pull in the ocean waters that forced the boat into the mountains."

    (Anchors):






    Some of Fasold's team of geophysicists and geologists are reserving final judgement until the excavation and carbon-dating.

    But in a British TV series on the environment next month, team member Vendyl Jones, a Middle East archeologist and inspiration for film character Indiana Jones, says it is "between maybe and probably" that they have found Noah's Ark.

    As you see in the drawing, the "buried ship" or the item discussed above is located south of Mount Ararat by 20 miles.

    Additionally, as indicated by the drawing, Mount Judi is locate 30 miles south of Lake Van which is 200 miles south of Mount Ararat.

    source: The Observer newspaper (London), 16 January 1994
    source: http://www.arksearch.com/najudi.htm and http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f...-turkey-21503/

  2. #2
    Philosopher Wannabe XIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Schrodinger's Box
    I don't think the Flood was historical...

  3. #3
    why is the ark buried?
    "With great looks comes great responsibility"

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by XIII View Post
    I don't think the Flood was historical...
    nalungkot naman ako. isa sa mga favorite kong story ito nung bata ako.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ischaramoochie View Post
    why is the ark buried?
    wild guess: namatay din ang ark?

    AH! AH! AH! AH! AH!


  5. #5
    Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. Ateo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Civitate Vaticana
    Did the Ark carry a pair of baby dinos? Sorry, I was unable to catch up what is the latest theology about the Ark.

  6. #6
    Philosopher Wannabe XIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Schrodinger's Box
    Quote Originally Posted by -alucard- View Post
    nalungkot naman ako. isa sa mga favorite kong story ito nung bata ako.
    Same here. It's just that there's no reason to think that the flood really happened nor is it really a central Christian doctrine. The RCC, if I recall correctly, professes agnosticism on this issue.

    Anyway, not really my area of expertise.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by XIII View Post
    Same here. It's just that there's no reason to think that the flood really happened nor is it really a central Christian doctrine. The RCC, if I recall correctly, professes agnosticism on this issue.
    maybe because it defies logic but who am i to question.

    there are things in the past (whether true-to-life or not) that mahirap talaga i-prove ang authenticity.

    off topic: hanggang ngayon nga pinag-uusapan kung saan naganap ang unang misa sa pilipinas. limasawa or masao? leyte or butuan? 492 years ago lang yan. what more kung thousands of years ago pa.

    nevertheless, nakakatuwa na din na naging part ng childhood ko ang story na ito.

    AH! AH! AH! AH! AH!


  8. #8
    Let's stop and talk awhile. tonton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Sumatra beans
    Quote Originally Posted by XIII View Post
    Same here. It's just that there's no reason to think that the flood really happened nor is it really a central Christian doctrine. The RCC, if I recall correctly, professes agnosticism on this issue.

    Anyway, not really my area of expertise.
    Are you telling me that the RCC actually REJECTS some parts of the bible?

  9. #9
    Philosopher Wannabe XIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Schrodinger's Box
    What rejection? Not taking things literally doesn't really amount to a rejection. For example, just because I'm not taking the Genesis account literally doesn't mean I'm not a Biblical Inerrantist.

    In what weird world does agnosticism (in that we do not know whether Noah's Ark is historical) amount to a rejection?

  10. #10
    If you have any doubt about what We have revealed to Our servant (Muhammad, SAW) then present just a single chapter (Sura) like it. Call your witnesses, besides God, if you are truthful.
    {2:23}

    Say: "If the whole of mankind and Jinns were to gather together to produce the like of this Quran, they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.

    {17:88}

    Verily in this (Quran) is a Message for people who would (truly) worship God.
    {21:106}

    This Quran is not such as can be produced by other than God; on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the worlds.
    {10:37}

    (It is) a Quran in Arabic, without any crookedness (therein): in order that they may guard against Evil.
    {39:28}

    The Unbelievers say: "Listen not to this Quran, but talk at random in the midst of its (reading), that ye may gain the upper hand!"
    {41:26}

    Do they not consider the Quran (with care)? Had it been from other Than God, they would surely have found therein Much discrepancy.
    {4:82}

    Had We sent down this Quran on a mountain, verily, thou wouldst have seen it humble itself and cleave asunder for fear of God. Such are the similitudes which We propound to men, that they may reflect.
    {59:21}

    And We have explained to man, in this Quran, every kind of similitude: yet the greater part of men refuse (to receive it) except with ingratitude!
    {17:89}

    Or, Who has made the earth firm to live in; made rivers in its midst; set thereon mountains immovable; and made a separating bar between the two bodies of flowing water? (can there be another) god besides God? Nay, most of them know not.
    {Noble Quran 27:61}

    Prior to you, too, We appointed men and sent revelations to them. If you do not know, ask the people of the scriptures!
    (We sent) clear proofs and the scriptures. Now, We have sent you this reminder (Quran) so that you may demonstrate the revelations to them. Perhaps they may reflect and ponder!

    {Noble Quran 16:43-44}
    ----------

    Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) can neither read nor write. He is a direct descendant of Ismael (PBUH), the first son of Prophet Abraham (PBUH).

  11. #11
    Let's stop and talk awhile. tonton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Sumatra beans
    Quote Originally Posted by XIII View Post
    What rejection? Not taking things literally doesn't really amount to a rejection. For example, just because I'm not taking the Genesis account literally doesn't mean I'm not a Biblical Inerrantist.

    In what weird world does agnosticism (in that we do not know whether Noah's Ark is historical) amount to a rejection?
    Ok. That's surprising. Any link on the RCC's agnosticism on the flood?

  12. #12
    [011:038] And as he was constructing the ship, whenever the chiefs of his people passed by him, they mocked at him. He said: "If you mock at us, so do we mock at you likewise for your mocking.

    [011:039] "And you will know who it is on whom will come a torment that will cover him with disgrace and on whom will fall a lasting torment."

    [011:040] (So it was) till when Our Command came and the oven gushed forth (water like fountains from the earth). We said: "Embark therein, of each kind two (male and female), and your family except him against whom the Word has already gone forth and those who believe. And none believed with him, except a few."

    [011:041] And he [Nh (Noah) ['alayhis-salm]] said: "Embark therein: in the Name of Allh will be its (moving) course and its (resting) anchorage. Surely, my Lord is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful." (Tafsir At-Tabar)

    [011:042] So it (the ship) sailed with them amidst waves like mountains, and Nh (Noah) called out to his son, who had separated himself (apart): "O my son! Embark with us and be not with the disbelievers."

    [011:043] The son replied: "I will betake myself to some mountain, it will save me from the water." Nh (Noah) said: "This day there is no saviour from the Decree of Allh except him on whom He has mercy." And waves came in between them, so he (the son) was among the drowned.

    [011:044] And it was said: "O earth! Swallow up your water, and O sky! Withhold (your rain)." And the water was made to subside and the Decree (of Allh) was fulfilled (i.e. the destruction of the people of Nh (Noah). And it (the ship) rested on (Mount) Judi, and it was said: "Away with the people who are Zalimn (polytheists and wrong-doers)!"

    [011:045] And Nh (Noah) called upon his Lord and said, "O my Lord! Verily, my son is of my family! And certainly, Your Promise is true, and You are the Most Just of the judges."

  13. #13
    Philosopher Wannabe XIII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Schrodinger's Box
    Quote Originally Posted by tonton View Post
    Ok. That's surprising. Any link on the RCC's agnosticism on the flood?
    You will not find anything as the Church has not ruled anything definitive about the subject. Usually, when the RCC does this it is because they haven't really decided which way to go yet. Example? The Shroud of Turin.

    Catholics are basically free to believe anything they want about the Deluge (so long as it doesn't do violence to Biblical Inerrancy). I, for example, am perfectly free to believe that the Deluge account in Genesis is just apocalyptic imagery by the author (a colorful metaphor of sorts). Others are persuaded to think that the Deluge wasn't really a global event but an isolated one (Genesis itself is ambivalent on the matter).

    We're not really pinned to a literalistic interpretation here and the Church hasn't really ruled either way with finality (thus 'agnosticism').

  14. #14
    [004:163] Verily, We have sent the Revelation to you (O Muhammad [sal-Allhu 'alayhi wa sallam]) as We sent the Revelation to Nh (Noah) and the Prophets after him; We (also) sent the Revelation to Ibrhm (Abraham), Ism'l (Ishmael), Ishq (Isaac), Ya'qb (Jacob), and Al-Asbt [the offspring of the twelve sons of Ya'qb (Jacob)], 's (Jesus), Ayyub (Job), Ynus (Jonah), Hrn (Aaron), and Sulaimn (Solomon); and to Dwd (David) We gave the Zabr (Psalms).

    [053:052] And the people of Nh (Noah) aforetime. Verily, they were more unjust and more rebellious and transgressing [in disobeying Allh and His Messenger Nh (Noah) ['alayhis-salm]].

    [023:023] And indeed We sent Nh (Noah) to his people, and he said: "O my people! Worship Allh! You have no other Ilh (God) but Him (Islmic Monotheism). Will you not then be afraid (of Him, i.e. of His punishment because of worshipping others besides Him)?"

    [023:026] [Nh (Noah)] said: "O my Lord! Help me because they deny me."

    [023:027] So, We revealed to him (saying): "Construct the ship under Our Eyes and under Our Revelation (guidance). Then, when Our Command comes, and water gushes forth from the oven, take on board of each kind two (male and female), and your family, except those thereof against whom the Word has already gone forth. And address Me not in favour of those who have done wrong. Verily, they are to be drowned.

  15. #15
    Quote Originally Posted by XIII View Post
    What rejection? Not taking things literally doesn't really amount to a rejection. For example, just because I'm not taking the Genesis account literally doesn't mean I'm not a Biblical Inerrantist.

    In what weird world does agnosticism (in that we do not know whether Noah's Ark is historical) amount to a rejection?
    baka naman dahil marami nang banat sa OT kaya ngayon e hindi na literal yun?! baka sa susunod e hindi na rin literal si Adam and Eve?! yung napangasawa ni Abraham si Sarah at si Hagar e baka hindi na rin literal yun?! kung babasahin mo ang OT, obvious naman na historical ang dating nito e, pinapakita kung pano nagkaroon ng tao, pano napunta ang "god's chosen people" sa Palestine, na-exile etc etc.

  16. #16
    Fire Bomber Lead Guitarist OrionPax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Metroplex
    To add to what XIII mentioned (metaphor or symbolism), here is the take of Catechism with regards to the Deluge

    Prefigurations of Baptism in the Old Covenant

    1219 The Church has seen in Noah's ark a prefiguring of salvation by Baptism, for by it "a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water": The waters of the great flood you made a sign of the waters of Baptism, that make an end of sin and a new beginning of goodness.

    The covenant with Noah

    56 After the unity of the human race was shattered by sin God at once sought to save humanity part by part. The covenant with Noah after the flood gives expression to the principle of the divine economy toward the "nations", in other words, towards men grouped "in their lands, each with [its] own language, by their families, in their nations".


    Quote Originally Posted by tonton View Post
    Ok. That's surprising. Any link on the RCC's agnosticism on the flood?

  17. #17
    Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. Ateo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Civitate Vaticana
    http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PG.HTM

    @Orionpax, from para.56 of the Catechism that you quoted, it seems clear that the RCC believes that the Flood and Noah were historical events.

    To quote the Catechism again,

    "The covenant with Noah after the Flood..."

    It appears that there was a Flood; and then right after the Flood, God entered into a covenant with Noah.

    This contradicts XIII's belief that the Flood was only metaphorical or symbolic. What say you?

  18. #18
    Fire Bomber Lead Guitarist OrionPax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Metroplex
    My take on CC 56 , it just makes mention of that specific event in Genesis (Flood) to segue into the salvific plan for mankind

    It does not necessarily means the Church believes it was a "historical" event


    Quote Originally Posted by Ateo View Post
    http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__PG.HTM

    @Orionpax, from para.56 of the Catechism that you quoted, it seems clear that the RCC believes that the Flood and Noah were historical events.

    To quote the Catechism again,

    "The covenant with Noah after the Flood..."

    It appears that there was a Flood; and then right after the Flood, God entered into a covenant with Noah.

    This contradicts XIII's belief that the Flood was only metaphorical or symbolic. What say you?

  19. #19
    Let's stop and talk awhile. tonton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2000
    Location
    Sumatra beans
    Quote Originally Posted by XIII View Post
    You will not find anything as the Church has not ruled anything definitive about the subject. Usually, when the RCC does this it is because they haven't really decided which way to go yet. Example? The Shroud of Turin.

    Catholics are basically free to believe anything they want about the Deluge (so long as it doesn't do violence to Biblical Inerrancy). I, for example, am perfectly free to believe that the Deluge account in Genesis is just apocalyptic imagery by the author (a colorful metaphor of sorts). Others are persuaded to think that the Deluge wasn't really a global event but an isolated one (Genesis itself is ambivalent on the matter).

    We're not really pinned to a literalistic interpretation here and the Church hasn't really ruled either way with finality (thus 'agnosticism').
    Quote Originally Posted by OrionPax View Post
    To add to what XIII mentioned (metaphor or symbolism), here is the take of Catechism with regards to the Deluge

    Prefigurations of Baptism in the Old Covenant

    1219 The Church has seen in Noah's ark a prefiguring of salvation by Baptism, for by it "a few, that is, eight persons, were saved through water": The waters of the great flood you made a sign of the waters of Baptism, that make an end of sin and a new beginning of goodness.

    The covenant with Noah

    56 After the unity of the human race was shattered by sin God at once sought to save humanity part by part. The covenant with Noah after the flood gives expression to the principle of the divine economy toward the "nations", in other words, towards men grouped "in their lands, each with [its] own language, by their families, in their nations".
    Ok thanks.

  20. #20
    Non est Deus. Fac cum eo. Ateo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Civitate Vaticana
    Quote Originally Posted by OrionPax View Post
    My take on CC 56 , it just makes mention of that specific event in Genesis (Flood) to segue into the salvific plan for mankind

    It does not necessarily means the Church believes it was a "historical" event

    Now, this post, OrionPax, confused me. If there was a Noah covenant between God and, er, Noah, was there a real Noah that God was making a covenant with or was that symbolic too?

    By the way, Jesus' lineage is via Noah, so let us not make Noah allegorical lest Jesus' lineage will be a BIG trouble.

    Luke 3:23...

    23Jesus, when he began his ministry, was about thirty years of age, being the son (as was supposed) of Joseph, the son of Heli, 24the son of Matthat, the son of Levi, ...

    the son of Arphaxad, the son of Shem, the son of Noah, the son of Lamech, 37the son of Methuselah, the son of Enoch, the son of Jared, the son of Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan, 38the son of Enos, the son of Seth, the son of Adam, the son of God.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Hot Topics

SPORTS:

Army a win away from title after four-set victory vs Cagayan, 25-19, 18-25, 25-18, 25-5

Army a win away from title after four-set victory vs Cagayan, 25-19, 18-25, 25-18, 25-5

read more
SHOWBIZ:

UP bestows Gawad Plaridel award to Nora Aunor

UP bestows Gawad Plaridel award to Nora Aunor

read more
BATANG GILAS:

Gilas Pilipinas finishes in 5th place in U-18 FIBA World Championship

Gilas Pilipinas finishes in 5th place in U-18 FIBA World Championship

read more
UAAP:

FEU wins 74-70 thriller against La Salle, takes top spot in standings

FEU wins 74-70 thriller against La Salle, takes top spot in standings

read more
US OPEN:

Want to know more about the US Open Fantasy League?

Want to know more about the US Open Fantasy League?

read more