Noah’s Ark Has Been Discovered – Again

A group composed of archaeologists, geologists, scientists, and biblical historians discovered the remains of Noah’s Ark in Iran. The location of Noah’s Ark may come as a surprise to many people, because Christians have always believed Noah’s Ark was on top of Mount Ararat, in eastern Turkey.

How do they know that the finding was Noah’s Ark?

According to a spokesperson, a lab in Houston, Texas used by the Smithsonian tested the alleged remains of the Ark and concluded that the remains found by the group were petrified wood, and that fossilized sea animals were inside the Ark.

Personally, I believe that the discovery does not prove that the petrified wood is part of the remains of Noah’s Ark. Even though the remains were found on a mountain, in a location more than 13,000 feet above sea level and even though the group claims to have found a 400-foot long object, the remains cannot be conclusively proven to be Noah’s Ark.

This brings us to an amazing conundrum.

In the past, many good and reputable archaeologists, geologists, scientists, and biblical historians have claimed that they had discovered Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat in Turkey.  Some of these folks have been inside the Ark and one of them even brought back a piece of the Ark.

I wrote a blog on Noah’s Ark.  To read my blog, “Searching for Noah’s Ark” and see a photo of Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat (the so-called Ararat Anomaly), click here

Now, we have a group of archaeologists, geologists, scientists, and biblical historians who affirm that they have found the Ark in Iran and they even bring back petrified wood to confirm their finding.

The fact is that both groups cannot be right.  There were not two Arks and there were not two floods.  So, one group is right and one group is wrong.  Which group is right and which group is wrong?  Where is the Ark?  In Turkey or in Iran?  I have no idea and this is the reason that I do not place much credence on claims that Noah’s Ark has been found.

Claude Mariottini
Emeritus Professor of Old Testament
Northern Baptist Seminary

NOTE: Did you like this post? Do you think other people would like to read this post? Be sure to share this post on Facebook and share a link on Twitter or Tumblr so that others may enjoy reading it too!

I would love to hear from you! Let me know what you thought of this post by leaving a comment below. Be sure to like my page on Facebook, follow me on Twitter, follow me on Tumblr, Facebook, and subscribe to my blog to receive each post by email.

If you are looking for other series of studies on the Old Testament, visit the Archive section and you will find many studies that deal with a variety of topics.

This entry was posted in Book of Genesis, Noah, Noah's Ark and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Noah’s Ark Has Been Discovered – Again

  1. >As far as I can tell, this does seem to be evidence that there was a huge flood, since there are sea animal fossils in wood that was found at a pretty high elevation. But the wood itself could be from any wood structure that was floating around or submerged during the flood, perhaps just some family’s house.


  2. >Jeremy,I agree with you. When the biblical text is properly understood, the concept of a universal flood may not fit within the cultural context of the writers. I am sure that whatever flood happened, it was a flood that affected the world of those living at that time. Thus, from their perspective, it was universal. Also, I am sure that petrified wood can be found in different places under different circumstances. None of these would prove that they were remains of Noah’s Ark.People who need to find the Ark have good motives: they want to convince people that the Bible is God’s Word. To those who are predisposed to deny or discredit the authority of the Bible, no amount of evidence will convince them that the Bible is God’s Word.Thank you again for your comment.Claude Mariottini


  3. Anonymous says:

    >So because you cannot believe two competing accounts, neither one is true? I don’t see how that is sound reasoning.”Cultural context?” There is good evidence all over the world that high elevations were under water. Guess what? If the water was as deep as mountains that are 10,000 feet above today’s sea level, it would have been that deep all over the world. Even today sea level is (with the exception of some anomalies such as the mid-ocean ridge) basically the same all over the world.


  4. >I think we have be careful declaring fossilized remains at high elevations as evidence for a worldwide flood. There are theories in geology which account for such finds.Regarding “cultural context,” I think what Dr. Mariottini is referring to is the limited perspective of the writer. Those in the Ancient Near East didn’t understand the world as we do today. They weren’t privy to the great tools we can make use of today (i.e., GPS, maps of the whole world, etc.). Hence, their concept the “the world” would have been different than our own. So, when they say “the world” was flooded, it’s a possibility that they were referring to a limited area compared to how we would interpret such.Man, I hope that made sense. 🙂


  5. >Chris,Thank you for your comments. I agree with the two points you make in your comments.First, petrified wood is not a good evidence that the fossilized remains are related to Noah’s Ark. Petrified woods can be found in many places and they prove nothing.Second, it is clear that from the perspective of the people who lived in pre-historic times, their world was mostly the region where they lived. For more details, read my response to anonymous that follows below.Again, thank you for visiting my blog.Claude Mariottini


  6. >Dear Anonymous,I believe you misunderstood the point I was trying to make. I did not say that the account is not true; I said that no one knows where the Ark is. The Bible says that the Ark rested on the mountains of RRT (the name of the place without the vowels). The word RRT can be aRaRat (a place in Turkey) or uRaRTu (a place in Iran).In the past two hundred years or so, there have been dozens of sightings of the Ark; many people have brought pieces of the Ark back with them, and a couple of people have claimed to have been inside the Ark. Yet, to this day people have not seen the Ark, there are no pictures of the Ark, and people still do not know where the Ark is.People who lived in pre-historic time did not know that there was another world beyond their world. When they said that the water covered the whole world, they were talking about their world (this is what Chris is saying in his comment above).According to Genesis 11:1-2 the world had one language and people began to migrate from the east after the flood. Genesis 11:9 says because of the Tower of Babel the Lord confused the language and people were dispersed them over the face of all the earth. That is the reason people have stories of a big flood in their own language. So, if there were no people in other lands there would be no need to send a flood where there was no one to be destroyed.Thank you for your comment.Claude Mariottini


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.