This last year has been a year of unprecedented interest in the work we have been so privileged to have a part in. But it has also been the year in which we finally found ourselves totally overwhelmed by the volume of calls, letters and orders, to such a degree that we temporarily were unable to keep up with everything. We have since gotten the help we needed -- Marty and Julie Plott of Murfreesboro, TN are now handling all of our orders and mail -- and we now feel we will be able to continue as before.
This issue is only the 3rd for this year, and our plan is to have 5 issues in 1997 to make up for lost time. Since our subscriptions go out according to "issue no." and not by "year", everyone will still receive 4 issues per subscription.
As time goes on, we face more and more opposition and obstacles, but as this increases we find that the work goes forward with more and more power. All of God's workers must expect this as we near the end. But we must also know that His work WILL be accomplished and not allow ourselves to be discouraged, and felt this subject needed to be addressed. On page 2, we discuss "Opposition" and our beliefs about it -- please read it.
All through the Bible, beginning with Cain and Abel, we read of the fury of Satan against the people of God. It seems "foreign" to those of us who live in a country with religious freedom to think about the reality of persecution for our faith. But it is happening. We see it all around us -- people who try to discredit God's work, and when that doesn't succeed, trying to discredit the workers. But we have seen how God has used these lies and slanders to get people's attention and interest, and when they examine the facts, they can see what is truth and what is not.
But some facts have not been made known. For example, some of the fiercest opponents of Noah's Ark are some who once had a part in the research. Some participated in independent research which they now claim disproved the site; however, their original reports of that research tell a different story. We will share some of these with you in this issue.
Also, there are numerous verbal claims which are not backed by any evidence whatsoever. Some of these tales are not true, a couple of which we also briefly discuss.
Be aware of the hatred Satan has for God's servants and God's Truth. He is the great liar and deceiver, and those who are controlled by him display the same rage and fury that Satan has. When God reveals new insights and evidences of His Truth, the evil one is right there to try to destroy it, just as he is depicted in Revelation, waiting to destroy the "child" even before it is born:
REV 12:4 ... and the dragon stood before the woman which was ready to be delivered, for to devour her child as soon as it was born.
The opposition to the evidences of Noah's Ark and all the other discoveries which God has provided to vindicate His Word is fierce. We have grown used to it and, in fact, actually use the level of opposition as a sort of "thermometer" -- when God's true workers are faithfully doing His work, they WILL experience opposition in some form. If the workers get remiss in their duties, the opposition lessens or even disappears.
The following are 2 examples of what we can expect as the time of Christ's return nears:
Several years ago, Jonathan gray of Australia contacted us after hearing about Ron’s discoveries. He came all the way to Nashville to talk to Ron and study the evidences. (At that time we didn’t have all the information in books and videos as we do now.) He went to the sites a number of times to investigate for himself and became convinced of the absolute authenticity of the evidences after long and serious study. With a burden for the lost, and the realization of the impact these evidences would have on those who had rejected the Bible, he devoted his life to traveling the world, sharing these things along with the Gospel.
Many have accepted the Lord as a result of his labors, but he, too, has and is facing opposition and persecution, and we ask your prayers for Jonathan, his family and work. He called us a few days go and told us that recently he had been invited to speak in Papua, New Guinea. There, he was actually “stoned” by leaders of his own denomination, who then burned down the church that had him speak. He is still recovering from that incident.
LUK 12:51 Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: 52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
Just 72 years ago, John T. Scopes was tried for breaking Tennessee’s law against teaching Darwin’s theory of evolution in the classroom. He was convicted and the teaching of evolution in Tennessee classrooms continued to be banned, at least for a while.
But my, how times have changed! On April 7, 1997, in Sydney, Australia, the discovery of Noah’s Ark goes to court in a trial that is expected to take up to a month. This trial is of monumental importance for not only is Noah’s Ark on trial, but the Word of God. It’s a story in progress, and here, briefly, is the beginning of the story:
In 1990, we met Dr. Allen Roberts of Australia who, after examining the evidences, became convinced of the Noah’s Ark site. He wanted to get involved in the work and was instrumental in forming an organization whose goal was to make known the evidences of the past research and raise funds for a proper excavation. We warned him about becoming involved in this work and the persecution that Ron has had to endure, but we never thought it would be as bad as it turned out to be.
In 1991, Dr. Roberts was with Ron, Richard Rives and Marv Wilson when they were taken hostage in Turkey for 3 weeks. But that was only the beginning of what he would have to contend with.
After his return from that ordeal, he began a 1992 lecture tour of Australia in which he shared the evidences of Noah’s Ark with the public. During these tours, he was verbally attacked at numerous of his meetings by an atheist geology professor from Melbourne University, by the name of Ian Plimer, who violently opposes creationism.
Dr. Plimer brought a lawsuit against Dr. Roberts, which will go down in history, at least as long as “history” lasts. The following excerpts about that lawsuit are from the article “Creationism in the Dock” in the November 30, 1996 issue of “New Scientist”:
A prominent Australia geologist has sold his house to finance a legal battle against a creationist who claims that Noah’s Ark has been found in Turkey. The case is believed to be the first in which a mainstream scientist has taken a creationist to court over the interpretation of scientific data to support a literal translation of the Bible.
Ian Plimer, head of the School of Earth Sciences at the University of Melbourne, alleged that videos, tapes and literature sold by an organisation called Ark Search, based in Canberra, are ‘misleading and deceptive’, and therefore in breach of Australia’s Trade Practices Act.... The case, which is expected to last a month, is scheduled to begin on 7 April in the Federal Court in Sydney, and will be heard by a single judge....
Other creationist groups, some of which also dispute Roberts’ claim to have found Noah’s Ark, are distancing themselves from Ark Search. ‘The case doesn’t involve anyone in the mainstream creation science movement,’ says Carl Wieland, head of the Creation Science Foundation in Brisbane, which has links to the Institute for Creation Research in San Diego.
However, Plimer also intends to challenge the evidence used by all creationists groups to support their central beliefs, in particular that the Earth was created between 6000 and 10,000 years ago and that, 4,000 years ago, a flood wiped out all existing life except the animals saved by Noah in his Ark....
In a bizarre twist to the case, Plimer will also be joined in court by a former creationist. David Fasold of San Diego, a former merchant seaman, alleges that Ark Search used drawings from his book, ‘The Ark of Noah’, without permission....”
Most of you are familiar with the name “David Fasold”, above mentioned as a co-litigant with Plimer against Dr. Roberts. As you will recall from our issues on “Noah’s Ark”, Ron took David to the Noah’s Ark site in March of 1985, at which time he became convinced of the validity of the remains and decided to continue working on the project. He returned with Ron 3 more times in 1985 and 1986. He wrote a book entitled “The Ark of Noah” in 1988 and went on to make numerous documentaries on the discovery of Noah’s Ark, all of which minimized Ron’s role in his involvement.
For years, he was the most vocal and militant supporter of the site, but in 1994, something happened which changed that. He met Ian Plimer. Through the years, we had been contacted by several attorneys who had clients who were being sued by Mr. Fasold, the last being Dr. Roberts’ attorney in Australia. He informed us of the charges, which were the same as the other cases -- infringement of copyright. Mr. Fasold accused Dr. Roberts of using his research without his permission, and the case was somehow intertwined with Dr. Plimer’s. But at the beginning, he was still a fervent supporter of Noah’s Ark.
Then, in August of 1994, a film crew from Australia came to Nashville to interview Ron. They were very secretive, although pleasant and nice at first. Ron was working at the hospital when they arrived so I met with them. Their questions were solely about the subject of Noah’s Ark and they were not offensive to me in any way. But they wanted to interview Ron badly, so I arranged to take them to the hospital to do their interview. Once there, their questions took on a much more offensive nature.
They wanted to film from our just opened museum so the next day, I met with them at our museum in Gatlinburg. They were still very secretive and continued to avoid telling me exactly who they were with and why they were there. The 2 cameramen filmed everything in the museum and even watched the videos, or at least portions of them pertaining to Noah’s Ark. Then, the cameramen set up and filmed the interviewer doing a very sarcastic segment on Ron’s belief in Noah’s Ark. By now, it was becoming very clear that they were not here to gather evidence -- they were here to try to discredit the site. We soon found out exactly what was going on when we found the producer’s notes that he accidentally left behind, which made it quite evident they came to “discredit this guy”, meaning Ron.
A few days after leaving here, the crew flew to Turkey where they met Mr. Fasold and Dr. Plimer at the Ark site. The two men apparently had become friends even though on opposite sides of the “Ark" question. And they had made a bet, the loser of which had to buy the other a steak dinner: Mr. Fasold would try to prove to Dr. Plimer that the site was the Ark, while Dr. Plimer would try to prove it was nothing but a geologic formation, all in a couple of hours on the site, with no scientific testing. In reality, it was just a contest of wits.
The examination of the site and the verbal debate between the friendly adversaries was filmed and shown on a well-known Australian TV program called “Four Corners”, of which we received a copy. No match for the cunning geologist, Mr. Fasold lost the bet. He then went on Australian TV and announced he had been wrong about the Ark site. Dr. Plimer now had a real trophy -- “the once determined advocate of Noah’s Ark” was now on his side. “The Sun Herald” article about the incident reported:
The creationist movement has been left high and dry by a former ally agreeing that a boat-shaped structure in Turkish mountains is not the remains of Noah’s Ark. The leading proponent of the controversial claims now agrees with an Australian geologist that the structure is not a boat.PSA 119:126 It is time for thee, LORD, to work: for they have made void thy law.
Stories in ‘The Sun Herald’ two years ago (about Dr. Plimer’s suit against Dr. Roberts) were indirectly responsible for bringing together the odd couple -- a former Christian fundamentalist from the US and Australia’s most prominent critic of the anti-scientific movement...
Please pray that God’s Truth will victor. And please pray for Dr. Roberts and his family. They have suffered tremendously, especially as a result of the immense legal costs. But they have not weakened in their faith and continue to press on.
And lastly, we ask that you pray for those who are persecuting God’s work and workers -- not only that He will victor over their lies and hatred of His Truth, but that through these things, they will learn what is Truth and be saved.
"A certain amount of opposition is a great help to man. Kites rise against and not with the wind. Even a head wind is better than none. No man ever worked his passage anywhere in a dead calm. let no man wax pale, therefore, because of opposition." John Neal, 1800's.
What do we do when false rumors and stories are circulated about us? It is human nature to want to lash out and prove our innocence of whatever lie is being told. but is that what we are to do?
How we react to persecution and our treatment of those who persecute us is a subject we feel is of extreme importance. Especially now ...
Down through the ages, those who have done the Lord's work have had to endure heavy trials and persecutions. Many have paid for their faith and obedience to Him with their lives. From the very beginning of this earth's history, there was fierce opposition between "good" and "evil".
GEN 3:15 And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt bruise his heel.
In yielding to temptation, Adam exalted himself above God by thinking himself wise enough to make his own decision, EVEN though it opposed the will of God. In doing so, he gained a knowledge of evil, and because of his disloyalty to God, he opened the "door" which flooded the earth with unspeakable woe. Satan thus obtained temporary rulership of this planet:
2 COR 4:4 ... the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.
There is no "middle ground" -- every human being is either "of God" of "of Satan":
EPH 2:1 And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; 2 Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience; ...
Those who love Christ with all their heart and soul and seek to be like Him are the great enemies of Satan. They, like Abraham, are temporarily "strangers in a land that is not theirs." Though they must dwell on this earth for now, they have not given their allegiance to its temporary "prince" -- they have instead pledged their obedience to the True King:
HEB 11:16 ...they desire a better country, that is, an heavenly; wherefore God is not ashamed to be called their God: for he hath prepared for them a city.
EPH 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God; 20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
These are those whom "the prince of this world" hates the most, and are those whom he has sought to destroy from the very beginning. His greatest desire is to extinguish the faith of the saints, that they will lose their eternal life and be ultimately destroyed along with him and his fallen angels; but if he sees that he cannot do that, he does all within his power to physically destroy them and hinder their work of spreading the Gospel of Salvation.
Those who are Christ's are NOT to expect a life of ease, abundance and freedom from care. In fact, we are told by Christ, Himself, it will be just the opposite:
JOH 15:19 If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. 20 Remember the word that I said unto you. The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.
Christ didn't say, "they MAY persecute you", He said "THEY WILL". And especially today, as we near the return of Christ, Satan is full of "great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time". (Rev. 12:12). There remains the finishing of God's work before He comes again, and we MUST be aware of the work of the evil one. We must understand what is going on around us.
I am reminded of the words of one faithful worker, over 100 years ago, wrote, "I should doubt whether I were a child of God, if the world, or even all professed Christians, spoke well of me. Those who are in earnest to win the crown of eternal life need not be surprised or disheartened because at every step toward the heavenly Canaan they meet with obstacles and encounter trials. The opposition which Christ received came from his own nation,..."
Because Satan knows God's Truth carries it's own power, he and his evil angels use unconsecrated minds to bring attacks against the messengers of God's Truth. "If you can't discredit the message, discredit the messenger":
MATT 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. 12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.
There are many people who present the appearance of "good" in their speech and the "gospel' they profess; but in reality it is the "prince of darkness" who is behind their facade of "righteousness". The enemy who wears his true uniform is easy to spot -- but the enemy who looks and professes to be "one of us" is the most insidious and dangerous:
2 COR 11:14 And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15 Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works.
These "ministers of righteousness" are foremost among the ones who point to those doing God's work and proclaim it to be lies, while claiming that THEY are God's true workers -- "Listen to me!" Especially when the Truth cannot be repudiated do they formulate false accusations and repeat slanderous remarks. This will not change while we live on this present earth.
But how is the Christian to react when faced with blatantly false accusations and severe persecution? Look at the life of Joseph, who was sold as a slave by his own brothers, then falsely accused by Potiphar's wife of a terrible deed and imprisoned. Even under these horrendous circumstances, he forgave his brothers. While in prison, Joseph's virtue and righteousness was so apparent that he came into such great favor with, first, the "keeper of the prison" and then, the king of Egypt, that the pharaoh declared unto Joseph:
GEN 41:39 ...there is none so discreet and wise as thou art: 40 Thou shalt be over my house, and according unto thy word shall all my people be ruled: only in the throne will I be greater than thou. 41 And Pharaoh said unto Joseph, See, I have set thee over all the land of Egypt.
Satan knows how to cleverly design the lies and accusations against the saints. In Joseph's case, he had no way to prove his innocence. It was his word against that of Potiphar's wife. And who would Potiphar believe -- his wife, or Joseph? Human nature leads men to take the word of those in "high positions" over the word of the lowly, common man. And Joseph was a slave.
Joseph's life was a lesson for mankind all through the ages -- he placed his reputation in the hands of the only Judge Who can truly know the heart. And for a season, it must have seemed bleak for him, locked up in that prison. But he never wavered in his faith and because of his righteous character, God was able to use him to provide a temporary safe haven for the nation of Israel to grow and thrive in. They were given the "best of the land, the land of Rameses", or "the land of Goshen" (Gen. 46:6, 11) all because of the favor given Joseph by the Pharaoh.
But our ultimate example is always Christ. Harsh words and thoughts of revenge against those who malign us bear no likeness to the character of Christ.
1 PET 2:21 ...because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye should follow his steps: 22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: 23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously:
Slander against one's character is seldom vindicated by indignant words and protestations of innocence. It is overcome by simple Truth. No one ever suffered as much contempt, slander and abuse as did our Saviour; yet in the fact of all of this, we have no record in the Scriptures of His protests of innocence. He instead preached the Words of Life, not allowing anything to distract Him from that work. His life, His example overcame all the lies and slander.
Let us read of His words when He was crucified:
LUK 23:33 And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left. 34 Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them for they know not what they do....
On the edge of death, in excruciating pain, His thoughts were toward those who were lost -- the very ones who were killing Him--, that they would still come to a knowledge of the truth. And we have on record of several who did exactly that:
MAT 27:54 Now when the centurion, and they that were with him, watching Jesus, saw the earthquake, and those things that were done, they feared greatly, saying, Truly this was the Son of God.
Sometimes, it is the example of a person's life and character that wins a soul to Christ as much as it is the hearing of words:
1 Pet 2:12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may be your good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.
Every soul, even those who attack us the most bitterly, is precious to Christ. When we loudly speak out against their attacks and protest that they are false accusations, we erect a barrier; that person is immediately on the defensive because we have counterclaimed that THEY are indeed the liar, not ourselves. And these very ones may, like Paul, honesty "think that he doeth God service" (John 16:2) by denouncing us. But they may simply still be in ignorance and know no better. They may not have yet rejected Truth and may yet be won to Christ.
We do not know who has and who has not rejected the last pleas of Mercy. We must not denounce our opponents nor treat them with a lack of respect. We must, as Joseph, place our confidence in God. We must have a care and consideration for those who are lost, no matter what they may have done to us, and pray for them as Christ did.
For many Christians, this may be the most difficult test they will ever face. For the last 1 1/2 years we have had to sit back and watch helplessly as someone we love dearly was falsely accused of a terrible crime he did not commit; a crime which evidence has proven he did not commit but which evidence was not allowed to be heard in court. Forsaken by his church and friends, he now is in prison facing a long sentence. But through this horrible ordeal, he has continued to manifest his faith in his Savior and has won many souls to Christ behind those bleak prison walls. During our many conversations with him, not once have we heard him speak vicious remarks about the one who set him up and arranged evidence to make him appear guilty. I dare say that he will have many stars in his crown; many souls will be saved that may have never gotten a chance to hear the Words of Life if he had not suffered so greatly -- and remained faithful in spite of the persecution he has faced.
Christ made sure His disciples didn't think the opposition would one day cease. In fact, He made it clear that our greatest enemies would many times be those closet to us:
Mat 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36 And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
Satan is constantly working to discredit God's Truth in whatever manner he can. But Truth carries a power with it, and it will prevail. Maybe not in our "timing', but in God's perfect timing. For a while, Joseph suffered greatly from the false accusations made against him. but he was vindicated and his innocence made evident.
LUK 8:17 For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be known and come abroad.
Many, many will oppose the Truth and speak out vehemently against it. But the more the arguments against it, the more Truth shines. Some who may never have taken an interest in it before, have their curiosity aroused when they hear the controversy; they decide to investigate this subject which is causing such a turmoil. Those who have a sincere desire to know what is Truth, will know and understand. for others, no amount of evidence will suffice to change their minds, which brings to mind another consideration.
While in exile, Nehemiah, the cupbearer of the Persian king, heard that his people in Jerusalem were in great distress. Like Moses and all those before him, he was overwhelmed with sorrow for the plight of his people, and wept, fasted and prayed on their behalf. When he was granted the king's permission to go to Jerusalem to organize the people and rebuild the wall, their heathen neighbors (who hated and mocked the Jews) were full of wrath. In their great hatred and jealousy of the Jews, they set out to put a stop to the work:
NEH 4:11 And our adversaries said, They shall not know, neither see, till we come in the midst among them, and slay them, and cause the work to cease.
But Nehemiah, knowing of the plot to attach Jerusalem, set watchmen on the unfinished walls, along with the workmen:
NEH 4:16 And it came to pass from that time forth, that the half of my servants wrought in the work, and the other half of them held both the spears, the shields, and the bows, and the habergeons;...
They went about the work God had given them to do, even when faced with the prospect of open attack. Nehemiah knew that the Supreme God would strengthen them, and he was not afraid of the opposition they faced. Satan had hoped to intimidate Nehemiah and the Jews; he hoped to put a stop to God's work by using "fear". But they refused to stop working on the wall -- they knew their God was able to protect and preserve them:
NEH 4:20, ...our God shall fight for us.
As the work progressed and the heathen neighbors saw that the work was almost finished (except for the doors of the gates), they resorted to a different method of attack. They sent messages to Nehemiah that all the surrounding nations believed the reason they were rebuilding the wall was so they could rebel against Persia and set up their own king. They threatened to go to the king of Persia with this accusation of revolt -- a threat that could have caused serious consequences if carried out:
NEH 6:6 ... It is reported among the heathen, and Gashmu saith it, that thou and the Jews think to rebel: for which cause thou buildest the wall, that thou mayest be their king, according to these words. 7 And thou hast also appointed prophets to preach of thee at Jerusalem, saying, There is a king in Judah: and now shall it be reported to the king according to these words. Come now therefore, and let us take counsel together.
The threat was a means to get Nehemiah to stop work and come meet with them, which was really a pretext to get him alone where they would kill him. But again, Nehemiah placed his faith in God and would not be intimidated nor distracted from the task at hand:
NEH 6:3 And I sent messengers unto them, saying, I am doing a great work, so that I cannot come down: why should the work cease, whilst I leave it, and come down to you?
When threatened openly by Sanballat that they would report them to the Persian king as traitors about to revolt, Nehemiah replied:
NEH 6:8 Then I sent unto him, saying, There are no such things done as thou sayest, but thou feignest them out of thine own heart.
Nehemiah never once shrank from the work; threats, open persecution and false accusations were met not with protestations but with the simple statement of fact and the refusal to stop work and go discuss it with them or anyone else. His total dependence on the God of his fathers was his only reliance:
NEH 6:9 For they all made us afraid, saying, Their hands shall be weakened from the work, that it be not done. Now therefore, O God, strengthen my hands.
Again, the Bible give us plain instruction on how to handle opposition. In this case, Nehemiah faced treacherous dangers -- had he been a man of weak faith who was intimidated into meeting with the heathen enemies, he would have surely been killed.
When threatened with being reported to the Persian king as a traitor, he knew the punishment was certain death. But he know that God would protect them and strengthen them to finish the work as long as they were faithful to Him and put their complete reliance in Him. He never condescended to expend any precious time and energy in counsel or debate with the opposition. And the result? They finished the wall.
If we allow the opposition to intimidate us -- stop us from the work we have been given to do in order to meet false accusations and try to work things out --, we will lose the battle.
2 PET 2:2 And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of. 3 And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.
We must go forward and have confidence that He can overcome all difficulties. We must learn to reflect the character of His Son when faced with persecution and false accusations, and not react with indignation.
ROM 5:3 ...but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulation worketh patience;
HEB 10:35 Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward. 36 For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise.
MAT 10:22 And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved.
HEB 10:37 For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry.
During the course of Ron's work on the various projects, numerous people have wanted to become involved. Some have felt Ron was unqualified to continue the work because of his lack of credentials and they pursued independent research without Ron.
While initially, some of these people declared a belief in the validity of certain discoveries, they today have changed their opinion. And we fully believe everyone has a right to their own opinion. However, sometimes all of the facts concerning some of the independent research isn't made available along with the "change of opinion", so we felt it was needful at this time to discuss some of these matters. Although we meet our persecutors with meekness and the same Spirit as Christ displayed, we are obligated to state the simple facts concerning His Work, that people may have the means to make an intelligent decision as to what they believe.
One month after the official dedication of Noah's Ark, independent radar scans were performed on the site. We were given a copy of what we were told was the "official" report of those scans. However, to be sure it was authentic, I took a copy of it to Turkey on our June 1992 tour and when Salih Bayraktutan met Ron and I in Erzurum on our last afternoon there, I personally showed it to him and asked if it was authentic. (I felt he would certainly know since his name was listed as co-author of the report. Salih is a professor at Ataturk University in Erzurum and is a member of the commission that was established to study Noah's Ark.) He assured me it was the official report. It is titled:
| JULY 1987 GEOPHYSICAL INVESTIGATION OF NOAH'S ARK (DURUPINAR SITE) MAHSER VILLAGE, DOGUBAYAZIT, AGRI | ||
| JOHN R. BAUMGARDNER UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ALAMOS NATIONAL LABORATORY | ||
| M. SALIH BAYRAKTUTAN ATATURK UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF ENGINEERING | ||
| NOVEMBER 1987 ERZURUM, TURKEY | ||
This report explains in highly technical language the process and data of their radar scans, which were performed by "geologist/radar operator Thomas Fenner"(p6). The scans were performed with an "SIR System-8 ground penetrating radar manufactured by Geophysical Survey Systems of Hudson, New Hampshire", whose "antenna was dragged across the site on transects spaced two meters apart. Radar pulses approximately 5 nanoseconds in width were transmitted at a repetition rate of 50 kHZ" (p. 2) with "the radar operating at a frequency of 120 MHZ in order to achieve the maximum penetration" (p.8).
In summarizing the data, the report states:
The most noteworthy feature observable in the data of Figure 7 is the V-shaped reflector that is particularly evident in the transects between y=-6 m and y =-50 m. When the topographical variation of the surface is taken into account, one finds that this feature is almost planar in form. The large amplitude of the back-reflected radar signal suggests a large contrast in the dielectric properties of the two sides of a sharply defined interface. The material above the interface presumably is the clay soil observable at the ground surface and exposed to several meters depth in the scarp surrounding the site and in cracks and gullies in the adjacent mudflow environment.
The crucial issue is the type of material which lies below the interface. Is it bedrock that rises up through the mudflow to form something like a small island around which the flow moves? Or is the material something other than bedrock. At least two considerations suggest that it is not bedrock. The first is that in the transects between y=2 m and y=20 m and x>0 in the vicinity of the rock that outcrops at the surface, one does not observe consistently strong reflections of a similar character. The most likely candidate for the bedrock material is the calc-schist rock that forms the hills on either side of the mudflow channel and that comprises the outcrop near the middle of the site. Since the low amplitude radar returns near the outcrop imply a small dielectric contrast between the clay soil and calc-schist rock, the strong reflections of the prominent V-shaped feature are probably not caused by a transition from clay soil to a calc-schist bedrock.
A second consideration which agues that the material below the reflecting interface may not be bedrock is that in several scans, especially between y=-18 m and y=-38 m, there is a double reflection, suggestive of a layer, rather than a simple transition into a material many meters thick. To find such an extensive, almost planar, layer buried within a channel through which a huge volume of mudflow material has moved in a chaotic fashion is highly anomalous from the standpoint of known landslide and debris flow mechanics. If the layer pertains to a buoyant manmade structure, the layer's present setting suggests that the structure has been transported to the present location by a landslide event where it was stranded upon the rock which now outcrops near the middle of the site.(Pps. 8 & 10).
In the last paragraph of this report, it states:
We conclude that the data from our geophysical investigations in no way conflict with the proposition that the unusual boat-shaped site near Mahser village contains the remains of Noah's Ark....
In simple terms, this report states that those radar scans did NOT rule out the possibility that the site contained "the remains of Noah's Ark".
In fact, the data presented in this report of a "sharply defined interface" that is "almost planar in form" is entirely consistent with Ron's 1984 conclusion that the floor of the hull is covered with ballast material, which he believes comprises the "interface" they detected. He had found large masses of manganese dioxide which had fallen out of the interior of the boatshaped object where a 3 foot section of the northern end had broken away leaving a hole into the interior. Ballast is placed in the hulls of ships to provide stability, and it is secured in sections which hold it in place and prevent it from shifting.
Could the "interface" they detected have been the actual petrified timbers of the floor of the hull, as well as the ballast? It's possible, -- in fact we believe this is quite likely. Since the density of the ballast material and that of the fossilized hull would be so much denser than the clay material and the calc-schist of the bedrock underneath the site, there would not be a recognizable interface between these 2 similarly dense materials. This concept is demonstrated by their statement concerning the "small dielectric contrast between the clay soil and the calc-schist rock".
The "planar" shaped interface varied between "4 to 8 m depth"(s), or 13 to 26 feet beneath the surface, which again confirms Ron's initial 1979 measurements taken through the longitudinal crack which was produced by the December 1978 earthquake. Ron's diagram with measurements, published in his 1980 booklet "Noah's Ark - Found" is seen at the bottom of this page.
Interestingly, it was the 1984 specimen of "ballast material" which Col. Jim Irwin sent to Los Alamos Labs for analysis as a favor to Ron which first captured John Baumgardner's interest and led to his participation in researching the site.
The above discussed report states in it's conclusion the necessity of doing some core drills, which they were able to do in July of 1988. For a moment let's consider the size of "core drills". Those taken during this 1988 independent group were 3 1/2 inches in diameter. The entire surface of the site would therefore accommodate several hundred thousand 3 1/2 inch core drills. How many were performed and what did they reveal?
In his August 19, 1988 "news" letter titled "A Search for the Elusive Ark", Dr. John Baumgardner wrote:
...Between July 28th and August 7th we succeeded, praise God, in drilling four holes to a depth of ten meters and recovered reasonably good cores from each of the holes. Three of the holes were near the centerline of the site while the fourth was near the outer flank of the longitudinal hump....
Another notable discovery was the presence at three locations in the mudflow layer of nodules of the bright yellow mineral limonite. Limonite is the hydrated oxide of iron, and its occurrence in the environment appears to be anomalous. Just how anomalous is the crucial question, since the minerals in the rocks in the source area of the mudflow have a moderate iron content. However, during the months now that I have worked at the site, I have never seen this bright yellow material anywhere in the fissures or exposures in the mudflow clay. Because earlier investigations led us to suspect unusual amounts of iron in the site, these occurrences of limonite are of special interest because they could represent the rusted remains of metallic iron objects.
A final observation concerning the core samples was the absence -- apart from the limonite nodules -- of possible evidence for man-made structure. There was, for example, no evidence for wood, petrified or otherwise. However, core drilling is severely limited in its ability to find buried archaeological structure, especially if it is sparsely distributed and has been significantly altered by decay and chemical weathering.
Taking 4 core specimens of 3 1/2 inch diameters from a site 515 feet long does not provide a fair representation of material present. And even with this minute amount of specimen, evidence was found of an extremely high iron content, including limonite.
Both the radar scans and the core drills, we are told by the writer of the independent research results, do not rule out the possibility that this is a man-made structure.
Some people have commented that the radar operator, Tom Fenner could not get the same results that Ron did in his numerous 1986 and 1987 scans. That is not the case. Mr. Fenner did not get the same results, but he could have.
When Ron spoke with Joe Rosetta, then vice president of Geophysical Survey Systems, concerning Tom Fenner's scans, Mr. Rosetta explained that Mr. Fenner had used the SIR-8 system at settings which would detect objects of greatest density at the maximum depth, which it did, and which is expressed in the above excerpted report.
Ron , on the other hand, had returned to the site many times and performed scans at varying frequencies, which penetrated to varying depths, AND he also performed scans in early spring when a greater amount of moisture is held in the fossilized superstructure which made it more reflective than in July when it is relatively dry.
Several years ago, Ted Stewart, owner of the Sunset Book Store in Lubbock, Texas and a teacher at the Sunset School of Preaching, visited us to personally investigate all the evidences. A thorough researcher, he called Tom Fenner in an effort to understand the radar scans and why Mr. Fenner didn't get the same results as Ron. When Mr. Stewart bluntly asked Mr. Fenner if Ron could have "faked" his readings, Mr. Fenner replied "no". He had watched the video of the initial scans as they were done and saw the printout as it occurred.
The independent researchers took four 3 1/2 inch core drill specimens from an area roughly equal to the surface area of 1 1/2 football fields. In that extremely small sample of the material of the site, they found evidence which could represent the remains of rusted man-made objects; but they found no evidence of petrified wood. This lack of petrified wood in this extremely minute sampling, in their own words, does not rule out the possibility that any is present in the site.
Today, most of the researchers involved in these independent surveys state publicly that they do not believe the site to be that of Noah's Ark. That is certainly their privilege. But the results of the radar and core drills remain valid. If their data did not rule out the possibility that the site contained man-made structure in 1987 and 1988, it certainly does not today. Opinions are different -- those change; but facts don't.
One scientist involved in the above work, when he examined the deck timber, told Ron it wasn't petrified wood because it didn't have any growth rings. As recently as this last month, we've heard that same belief expressed by another educator. Yet, even evolutionist geologists all over the world recognize that what they term "Carboniferous" wood HAS NO GROWTH RINGS:
...If we can imagine horse-tails enlarged from their present 3 feet to trees 60 to 100 feet high, we reproduce the Calamites of the Carboniferous forests. In their youth these trees had exactly the same structure as the horsetails; only as they grew older did they acquire wood and the secondary bark that supported them and led the sap to all parts of the plant.
The giant club mosses Sigillaria and Lepidodendron, the main inhabitants of the Carboniferous forest, raised their tufts of leaves 60 to 100 feet above the ground....
To support trunks of six-foot base diameters and 60- to 100-foot height, tissues must increase in thickness from year to year. There was, as we have already said, secondary bark and wood, similar to that of modern trees but lacking the spring and winter rings which correspond to seasonal alternation of moisture and dryness. This is further proof that the Carboniferous climate was fairly uniform.
(The Larousse Encyclopedia of the Earth, published by The Hamlin Publishing Group Limited, London-New York-Sydney-Toronto, copyrighted 1961, revised edition 1972).
... In 1951, Baxter, in his publications of the transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science, made something into print which many geologist already knew, which happens to be true all over the world as far as I've been able to find. He says this, "It has been shown that a lack of annual rings is characteristic of wood of all carboniferous plants the world over". It's true here; it's true of the trees I've looked at in America and everywhere else. They just don't have any annual ring system.
(John Mackay, Creation Research (Australia) Director - the above is an excerpt from his speech during his debate at Oxford University sponsored by the Association of Geological and Earth Sciences).
What causes growth rings? We need to examine this question carefully:
FACTORS THAT REGULATE GROWTH
The environment. Temperature.
The environment in which an organism lives plays an important role in modifying the rate and extent of growth....
The width of trees increases partly by cell division and enlargement of secondary meristematic tissue below the bark. During the cold of winter, cell division and enlargement may cease completely; but during the spring renewed growth occurs. This intermittent growth is influenced by temperature, light and water. The amount of growth may decrease considerably if the spring is cold, if day length is changed, or if a drought occurs. In fact, the width of the growth rings visible on the surface of the cut tree trunk provides a partial history of climatic conditions, the spacing of the growth rings of different sizes having been correlated with known periods of drought and cold to provide reliable archaeological dating of various structures, as in the timbers used in Indian pueblos in the southwestern United States."
(The Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1985 ed., Macropaedia vol. 8, p 442.)
The woody seed plants, such as conifers and broadleaf trees, are the most amenable to determination of age. In temperate regions, where each year's growth is brought to and end by cold or dryness, every growth period is limited by an annual ring - a new layer of wood added to the diameter of the tree.... In the moist tropics, growth is more or less continuous, so that clearly defined rings are difficult to find.
(Ibid., Macropaedia, vol. 10, page 915.)
Temperature, light and water supply are the determining factors of growth rings. When temperatures get low enough, cell division ceases completely. Lack of light or absence of water can also halt growth, which would cause a tree ring to form. This accounts for the fact that the age of a tree cannot be determined by counting rings. Perhaps there was a drought, or several droughts during a season. Or perhaps, as we have just experienced, there was an "Indian summer" after an early frost. In these cases, there may be numerous rings in a single year. But what about before the flood? The Biblical account is very short, but the information is abundant:
(GEN 2:4) These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that that LORD God made the earth and the heavens, (5) And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the Lord God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground. (6) But there went up a mist from the earth, and watered the whole face of the ground.
There was no rain before the great flood, which is one reason the coming deluge, as preached by Noah, was considered so ludicrous by the masses of people. The earth was watered by a mist which "went up" from "the earth". This indicates a uniformly moist and temperate climate without any "seasonal" temperature changes.
Amazingly, one 1931 geologic textbook describes these very conditions when describing the climate of one portion of the "Carboniferous" period which they termed the "Pennsylvanian":
Pennsylvanian Climate. Many years ago the plant life of the great coal period was thought to imply a warm to tropical, very moist, uniform climate. More careful study, however, clearly points to a temperate, only relatively humid, but remarkably uniform climate. Some of the criteria favoring this latter view may be stated as follows: The great height and size of the plants together with their frequent succulent nature and spongy leaves indicate luxuriant growth in a moist, mild climate; absence of annual rings of growth shows absence of distinct change of seasons; the presence of aerial roots, by analogy with similar modern plants, implies a moist and warm climate; the nearest present-day allies of the coal plants attain greatest growth in warm and humid climates; at present the greatest accumulations of vegetable matter in bogs and marshes take place in temperate climates where decay is not too rapid and thus suggests a similar climate for the accumulation of the coal deposits; and the remarkable distribution of almost identical plant types in Pennsylvanian rocks from Arctic to tropical regions clearly show a pronounced uniformity of climate over the earth.
(Elements of Geology, by William J. Miller, pub. By D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc., NY, 1931, p. 352.)
The term "Carboniferous" was coined to describe a period of "geologic time" which supposedly began about 345,000,000 years ago and lasted until about 65,000,00 years ago, based on the concept of evolution. But as we have discussed before, this is because evolutionary scientist think it had to take millions of years for the various "strata" to form or be laid down. So, what does the "Christian" believe? Sadly, many believe this is exactly what happened.
Well, the real problem began just over a hundred years ago, when we "humans" began to think we were getting "too smart for God", and Darwin's "theories" began to make a lot of sense to those of the "higher intellect". But God raised up men to fight all the "lies and vanity and things wherein there is no profit", to show that known "science" and facts agree perfectly with the Biblical account. And it is indeed a fierce battle for those who seek the truth. Those who now believe the Biblical account of creation are termed "creationists", a term which is spoken with much disdain among the scholarly crowd. We know of college professors who have lost their positions because of their belief in the Biblical account and their refusal to teach evolutionary science. But you would think that the religious "leaders" would support the truth, right? Well, think again as you read these excerpts from the Nov. 4, 1996 U.S. News & World Report:
...Did God create mankind in his image, as the Bible says, or did humans evolve from animals, as Darwin theorized nearly 150 years ago? According to Pope John Paul II, evolution may be the better explanation. Weighing in on a debate that has divided Christians for decades, the pope declared that evolution is "more than just a theory" and is fully compatible with the Christian faith.... John Paul II went further than previous popes in declaring that a "convergence" of scientific evidence gathered in the past 50 years makes "a significant argument in favor of this theory....
But while the evil one pursues his work of trying to discredit the truth of the Bible, God is continually opening new evidences to His people. Around the same time the above article came out, we received Creation Research's, Creation News newsletter, which contained the following article on the front page:
Many evolutionary geologist mock Noah's Flood, claiming one flood should have produced one massive layer of rock world wide. Now a unique Creation Research discovery is real mud in the eye of such theorists. The worst flood this century in parts of Washington State, USA, during February 1996, has also produced the best flood deposits. Discovered by Creation Research during February field work in west and windy Washington these flood bed contained 150 or more layers produced from one week of flood waters.(A photograph accompanied the article.)
John MacKay's wonderful discovery is absolute evidence that a flood lays down NOT one single strata, but in this case 150 IN ONE WEEK! And this Washington State flood was small, even minute, when compared to the universal flood of Noah's time.
Creation Research of Australia is headed by John MacKay, and is doing a wonderful work in getting the truth into public schools all over the world. They can be reached as follows:
When we rush to blindly accept the "word" of learned men, scientist, scholars and theologians based on the fact that they are supposed to possess higher knowledge and are men of "good reputation", keep one thing in mind -- there were certainly "wise men", scholars and scientists BEFORE the flood; but how many got on the ark?
Almost everyone who has read about Noah's Ark to any extent has come across the various and sundry "tales" about ark sitings throughout the years- dozens of tales, all different places, all different details, and etc., etc. But a good number of those who still believe the Ark has to be on Mt. Ararat, and have rejected the evidence of the true site, try to make the various stories all point to a favored site on Ararat. There is no need to go over these various stories as they are well known.
But there is one particular story that does need to be discussed at this time. It will demonstrate quite clearly how tall tales "get taller" and why we must be so very careful.
One person Ron took to the ark site became convinced it was the true ark. (I won't mention his name because it is not our intention to point him out -- only to make known what occurred and how.) He had read all the "ark tales" and believed one, in particular, had been erroneously reported. He believed it was not a tale about an "ark siting" on Ararat, as the story stated, but that it in fact referred to the real site, 12 miles south of Ararat.
The article is seen above, but in summary, the Nov. 13, 1948 Associated Press story presents about a Kurdish farmer named "Reshit" who said he saw a ship resembling a house about 2/3 of the way up Mt. Ararat. Supposedly, the unusually warm weather had caused the ice and snow to melt enough that the "prow of a ship" was "protruding into a canyon down which tons of melting ice and snow had been rushing for more than two months".
During one of Ron's trips to the site in the mid-eighties, the individual earlier mentioned, also present, set out to find "Reshit". And, as things go, the locals obliged him and returned with a man named "Reshit", then about 60 years old. To make a long story short, this "new Reshit" was out in his field one day when an earthquake struck. Up from his field popped a ship. It was NOT on Mt. Ararat. And, of course, everyone believed it was Noah's Ark. Further "details" emerge -- the earthquake struck on May 15, 1948, which happened to be the day Israel became a state. By now, the original 1948 report bore no resemblance to this "new" tale. See Isaiah 50:11.
At the time the interview took place with the "new Reshit", Ron’s Turkish liaison, Mine Unler, and the governor of the province of Agri, Gov. Sevket Ekinci, were also in Dogubeyazit. After seeing what was taking place, Ron asked the governor (through Mine) to ask Reshit if he was telling the truth. In the lobby of the Ararat Hotel (now the Isfahan Hotel), the Gov. went over to Reshit and questioned him. Reshit readily admitted that a group of men had come to him and asked him if he would like to "make a tourist happy" and also "make some money". Of course, he was more than willing. When brought to the hotel, all he did was "follow the lead" when questioned, answering in the affirmative when asked each detail. "Var, var, var!". ("Yes, yes, yes!") Money exchanged hands and everyone was happy. Of course, once he learned what the story was he repeated it when questioned.
When Ron told the man who was with him (who had sought the "new Reshit") what the governor had said, he would not believe it. He had gotten the story he wanted and seemed to believe it was true.
That some people actually try to "create" their own reality is seen in another example involving this very same ark story. Lloyd R. Bailey, in his book, Where is Noah's Ark, pub. By Abingdon (1978) recounts on pp. 56 & 57, the 1949 expedition of A. J. Smith, the dean of a small Bible College in North Carolina. Smith's "goal was to locate Reshit, hire him to serve as guide, and verify that the ark had at last been discovered. Unfortunately, however, Reshit could not be found. A search of villages 'for 100 miles around' failed to produce anyone who claimed ever to have seen the ark or even anyone who had heard the story."
Author Bailey goes on to discuss the authors of another book on the ark, and how they "are so predisposed to believe such secondhand hearsay that they seek to explain away Smith's on-the-spot evidence (or lack of it)."
Another thing the original article about Reshit's story mentions is that "There is no folklore there about the ark,..." This is exactly what Ron discovered when he first began his field work in Turkey. His required Turkish liaisons traveled with him to a large number of villages in the region, asking about information on a large ship in the area. No one knew anything about a ship, much less Noah's Ark.
There is a good reason for this. In 1915-1917 the original inhabitants of this region were completely run out, and the people who "moved in" had no knowledge whatsoever of any "folklore" of the region. Being tribal and closed to communication with any neighbors (just as they are today) they had no knowledge of the history or folklore of the region.
Sadly, serious researchers studying the evidences of Noah's Ark, have innocently accepted the "new" story of "Reshit" as being factual because they did not have access to "the whole story". That is the sole reason we have discussed it here.
One of the biggest frustrations we experience is the total vulnerability people have to any tale that comes along. Another example is the 1993 documentary that was shown of CBS entitled The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark. One of it's featured stories was that of George Jammal who showed a piece of wood he claimed came from the ark. His tale began with he and his companion, "Vladimir" climbing Mt. Ararat in 1984 and finding the ark. They even made photographs, but unfortunately, "Vladimir", while making photographs, fell into a crevice (with the camera) and of course, died.
George Jammal's story was recommended to the producers by a well-respected educator in the field of creation science who vouched for Jammal and the integrity of the story. However, it turned out that Jammal had never even been to Turkey. His wood was not from Noah's Ark, but was just a piece of contemporary wood he had cooked in teriyaki sauce and other juices. The hoax caused quite a stir and rated a full page in the July 5 1993 "Time Magazine".
The point is that Jammal's story was accepted at face value by a man who is supposed to be a "careful scientist", yet, he didn't even ask Jammal for any evidence that he'd ever been to Turkey -- not even his visa stamp in his passport. And Jammal did not perpetrate his hoax alone -- he was coached by a member of the Skeptics Society for the sole purpose of exposing "the shoddy research of Sun International" (Time Mag.)
Sometimes tall tales are innocently repeated by people who sincerely but mistakenly believe they are true; but sometimes, as we have seen, they are purposefully concocted. Sometimes, they are accepted as fact without the proper research to verify if there is just cause to believe they may be factual, as we have also seen. When God reveals things for His people, the evil one and his fallen angels are right there, ready to do whatever it takes to take away what He has given us, and to TRY to turn His Truth into a lie. But remember His promise, that “the Spirit of truth” and NOT man, will “guide you into all truth:...” (Joh. 16:13).
One question Ron has been asked numerous times is “What do real archaeologists say about the Noah’s Ark site?” In our video, “Discovered -- Noah’s Ark”, Ron is seen discussing the evidence with Dr. Ekrem Akurgal in March of 1985. Dr. Akurgal states, “At any rate, it is a ship, an ancient ship... It must be preserved...” Who is this “Dr. Akurgal?”
In almost every university library I have been to, I have found at least one book written by Dr. Akurgal. (He has written at least 16). On the back cover of his book entitled, Ancient Ruins of Turkey (first published in 1969, fifth edition in 1983, published by HASET KITABEVI), we are told a little bit about the author:
Professor Dr. Ekrem Akurgal studied from 1932 to 1940 in Berlin, where he received his Ph.D. In 1941 he became a lecturer at the University of Ankara and was elected professor in 1949. During the last twenty-five years, he has conducted excavations at Smyrna, Sinope, Phokaia, Daskyleion, Pitane and Erythrai. Since 1967 he has again been excavating in Ancient Izmir. Professor Akurgal is a member of the Turkish High Commission for Ancient Monuments. He is also an ordinary member of the Austrian and German Archaeological Institutes. The author was elected an honorary member of the Society for the Promotion of Hellenic Studies in London and the American Institute of Archaeology. He is a foreign member of the British, Austrian, Swedish, Danish and French Academies (Academie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres). He was visiting Professor at the University of Berlin (West) in 1971-1972, at the Sculoa Normale Superiore at Pisa in 1976 and at the University of Vienna in 1980 -- 1981. He has lectured since 1951 in several universities on the Continent, in the USA, and in great Britain as well as in the USSR. He received an honorary doctorate (Dr. h. c.) from the University of Bordeaux in 1961. Holder of the Goethe Medal (1979), he was awarded the (Grand Prize) of the Turkish Ministry of culture (1981).
Ron first met with Dr. Akurgal in 1984 when the Turkish Government sent their own team of scientist to independently investigate the “boat-shaped object”. Dr. Akurgal, considered “The Dean of Turkish Archaeologists”, was provided the results of Ron’s research as well as that of the Turkish team.
In March of 1985, Ron took David Fasold to the site for the first time. Mr. Fasold wanted to also meet Dr. Akurgal, so Mine Unler arranged a meeting in Ankara before they went to the Ark site. It is a portion of this meeting that is seen in our video on Noah’s Ark.
Ron met with Dr. Akurgal again after the official results of the study were made public, when he officially stated his opinion that the site contained the remains of an ancient ship, based on all evidence.
He presented Ron with a copy of his book, Ancient Ruins of Turkey, and inside, he autographed it.
Dr. Akurgal is extremely well respected, not only in Turkey, but throughout the entire world. His credentials and accomplishments are remarkable. Yet, most people in this country are not familiar with his work and reputation.
We were very pleased when, on his last trip to Turkey, Ron read the following article in the august 1996 Turkish Airlines SKYLIFE Magazine. Now, our readers can learn about the “real archaeologist” who played a major role in the official decision of the Turkish government that the “boat-shaped site” does indeed contain the remains of “Noah’s Ark”. It is written in both Turkish and English, and to save space, we have cut out the Turkish-language portion of most of it.
Prof. Dr. Ekrem Akurgal is Turkey’s most prominent archaeologist, whose research is closely followed in the world of historical and archaeological studies. During his long university career he trained hundreds of the young archaeologist desperately needed by a country overflowing with ancient sites left by scores of civilisations over the past twelve thousand years.
As well as lecturing at Turkish and foreign universities, Akurgal has engaged in innumerable excavations with his students, publishing the results in hundreds of papers and several books. Like all truly great men, Prof. Dr. Ekrem Akurgal is a thinker of broad perspective, who does not focus merely on revealing and interpreting the evidence of past civilisations, but takes a close interest in modern society, seeking the historic roots of current events and proposing solutions for present and future.
Akurgal’s work has given him insight into the way in which societies have influenced one another throughout history, so generating constant change. He points out that just as we must take the influence of the Hittites, Phoenicians and other civilisations into account when examining Greek art, so we cannot ignore the Persian, Arab, Greek, Roman and Byzantine influences on Anatolian Turkish culture and art. Every culture absorbs borrowed elements and reinterprets them within its own cultural framework, and this is a process which has been repeated over and over again in Turkey. In this sense, the modern Turks are the cultural descendants of the Hittites, Urartians, Phrygians, Lydians, Carians, Lycians, and the many other peoples who have inhabited this well trodden land.
Akurgal was born on 30 March 1911 on his grandfather’s farm at Tulkarem in Haifa, now part of Israel. The famous ruins of Caesareia were very close to the farm and one day when his mother was wandering around the ruins she discovered an old Turkish coin dating from the fifteenth century. Having attached some blue beads divert the evil eye, she pinned this coin on baby Ekrem’s jacket. This was a mere coincidence, but an interesting one for a child who was to spend his life searching for artifacts amidst ancient ruins.
Receiving his honary doctorate from Bordeax University, 1961
Presenting Eisenhower with an honary doctorate at the Faculty of Political Science, 1958
With the German Cancellor Kiesinger, 1968
In 1913 the family moved to Istanbul and apart from a brief interlude living on another farm at Akyazi near Adapazari, remained there. Ekrem Akurgal completed his primary and secondary education in Istanbul, and went on to study law. A year later he won a scholarship to Germany, and abandoning law he spent the next nine years in Berlin studying archaeology, history and Turkish art.
Armed with his doctorate Akurgal returned to Turkey, and in 1941 began teaching at the Department of Archaeology at Ankara University. He became a professor in 1949 and a distinguished professor in 1957. In 1958 he was appointed dean of the faculty, and took the opportunity to establish a new library.
Akurgal has been awarded several medals and orders in recognition of his achievements by diverse countries ranging from the United States to Russia. Although he retired in 1981, Prof. Dr. Ekrem Akurgal has continued his writing and research at an undiminished pace. Indeed, he declares that retirement has left him even more time for research than before. He now lives in Izmir on the Aegean coast, close to Bayrakli where he led his first excavation in 1948.
As you have seen in the previous article, Dr. Akurgal is a “real archaeologist”. It would be difficult to believe he is the type of man who would declare a site to be Noah’s Ark simply for the sake of tourism. Yet, that is essentially the claim that has been made by some who were unhappy with the official Turkish decision, of which Dr. Akurgal had a part. I would find it hard to believe that a man who presented then President of the United States, Dwight D. Eisenhower, with an honorary Doctorate at the Faculty of Political Science in 1958 would jeopardize his reputation by taking a position he did not believe to be accurate.
In newsletter no. 12 (which is also in our Ark of the Covenant book) we discussed the etching of a cherub which was found in the quarry underneath the Muslim section of the old city of Jerusalem. If you will recall, we discussed this quarry because Ron had found one of the numerous pillars of rock (left in place to prevent collapse) was not actually “rock”, but dirt and debris piled up to look like a pillar of rock. This, he believes, hides an entrance from the city into the cavern.
He also found a blocked up tunnel, which he believes may be the path taken by those who hid the Ark of the Covenant and other items from the temple.
The etching of the cherub was found on the wall of one of the stone pillars in the general vicinity of the tunnel entrance. We showed a sketch made by the Charles Clermont-Ganneau expedition that studied the cavern, but we could find no photographs. Clermont-Ganneau, a French scholar, was the first to systematically research the cavern, and was sponsored by the Palestine Exploration Fund. He first spotted the etching, carefully sketched it, then removed it and the block of stone around it, sending it to the Palestine Exploration Fund office in London.
Because of it’s typical Assyrian style, it was dated to the time when Jerusalem was under the cultural influence of Assyria, which was the time of the first temple period. It also fit the Biblical description of a cherub. Ron theorized that it was possible that when the Ark and other items were hidden just prior to the destruction of Jerusalem by the Babylonians, this “cherub” was carved on the wall near the tunnel through which they were taken, symbolizing the protection of God’s angels over these holy things.
We had always wanted to see the actual etching itself, but couldn’t find a single photograph of it anywhere. Then several months ago, our longtime friend, Marv Wilson of Celina, Texas came by one day. He and his wife Renetta have traveled with us throughout Turkey, Egypt and Israel (Marv was with Ron in 1991 when they were taken hostage in Turkey) and they knew our desire to see the cherub. Marv handed me 2 photographs, and told me a very interesting story...
Marv and Renetta travel extensively, and in spring of 1995 they went to London. The booklet we had received several years ago at Zedekiah’s Cave stated that the stone etching was then (in 1989) in a large museum in London. I won’t mention the name of the museum because of the story Marv and Renetta related of what they found out in London.
They went to the large museum and asked to see the etching. No one knew anything about it, but they kept inquiring. they finally explained the story of the etching to their person in charge at the museum, who went and looked it up. She informed them that she did indeed find the object in the records, but that it was not at this museum. It was at the office of the Palestine Exploration Fund -- the same organization that had sponsored the expedition that had removed the etching.
She gave them the address and Marv and Renetta went there. They were cordially invited into the office. When they explained the reason they were there, they were told that “yes”, the etching was in the basement. They were taken down and allowed to photograph it. Then, they were told that it had been hidden for many years and only recently had been put back on display.
The reason was as follows: Many years ago, the curator of the large museum they had first visited had desperately wanted the etching for his museum. Because of the “political clout” this museum possessed, it was feared that he would succeed in obtaining it, so it was hidden away. It remained in hiding until after the death of the man who wanted it. By then, it was pretty much forgotten until a few years ago.
One of the photographs Marv and Renetta gave us can be seen on the color photo page. Considering the story of how it had been hidden away for so many years, and then virtually forgotten, it will be interesting to see the final outcome of everything and what, if any, significance comes of it. And, we want to thank Marv and Renetta for the photos!
As you will recall, when Ron began excavating the site he had referred to as “Jeremiah’s Grotto” (not the traditional site) in search of the Ark of the Covenant, the first thing he found as he cleared out the dirt and debris down the cliff-face was a group of 3 niches, or shelf-like cut-outs, in the face of the quarried wall of Mt. Moriah. Later, he found several squarish holes he believed held crosses for crucifixions, with one hole on a ledge several feet above the others, and all buried beneath several destruction levels.
The cross hole on the ledge, he later discovered, was about 14 feet below the bottom edge of the lowest “cut-out”, which led him to conclude that this was the hole which held the cross of Christ, with the signs reading “Jesus, King of the Jews” written in the 3 languages of Jerusalem at the time being placed in the shelf-like “cut-outs” above.
He had learned from his research that it was the normal practice of kings and others to place signs in highly visible places, carved in rocks, but we had never seen any that were clearly like these. There was no other explanation for 3 large niches cut out in the face of a cliff, over 14 feet above what was then ground level -- but we still have continued to search for other similar examples.
We learned a long time ago that we can search and search for something, and then, from where we least expect it, we find it. During the course of his research in the Babel area of Turkey, Ron has developed a friendship with a young man who lives in the region, and who acts as his guide. On several occasions, Ron has asked him to do “advance work”, checking out possible locations prior to Ron’s arrival. On his last trip, Ron saw a site he wanted to further explore, but some unrest in the region made it necessary to cut the visit short. So he asked his young friend to return and photograph everything in the area.
When we received the photographs from him, I went through them since Ron was out of town at the time. The notes on the photographs indicated that the large stone structure along the Euphrates was an ancient Roman building, which he termed a “castle”.
The last photographs were the ones that caught my attention -- they were of a chiseled-out niche in the rock with an inscription. In 2 of the photographs I could make out the name “Vespasian”, the Roman emperor after Nero who came to the throne in 69 AD. (about 38 years after the crucifixion of Christ) and ruled until he died in 79 A.D. (It was Vespasian’s son, Titus who captured Jerusalem in 70 A.D. and destroyed the temple, ending the Jewish War with Rome.)
One feature of this niche with the inscription, in particular, caused me to run and get out our photographs of the “cut-outs” Ron had found: the shape of the upper edge of the carved-out niche with Vespasian’s name was curved, not straight as was the bottom ledge. As I compared it with our photos of the “cut-outs” Ron had found, I saw the same curve in the upper edge of the “cut-out” on the left!
Of the 3 “cut-outs” Ron had found, they were in a staggered configuration -- two were on the right side (facing them), one above the other, with the third one on the left. Of the two on the right, the top edge of the lower niche formed the ledge of the upper one. It did not display this “curve” which makes perfect sense -- if a sign was to be placed on the ledge, it would have needed to be straight, not curved or else the sign would not have set straight. The top niche has no defined upper edge as it appears that the natural indentation of the cliff-face was used as the inset.
Here was positive evidence that these “cut-outs” were distinctly Roman in style AND that they dated to the general time of the Roman occupation of Jerusalem.
See the “color photo” page for a photograph of the niche with Vespasian’s name and a photo of the “cut-outs” in the cliff-face for comparison.
|
||
|
||
|
