"100% Noah's Ark!" Did they really find it?

Did they really find Noah's Ark? If so, is this a game-changer in proving the Bible is true?

In eastern Turkey, about 18 miles south of Mount Ararat, an exposed ridge called the Durupinar Formation has renewed hope that this is the location of Noah's Ark described in Genesis 6-9. The formation is a large boat-shaped area of land. The idea that it is the actual Ark seems to be gaining momentum the more research that is done. It's fascinating!

What if it turns out to be the boat that Noah (and presumably his sons) took 75-100 years to build? Imagine it being proven, through petrified wood and animal DNA analysis, to be Noah's Ark! Will those who have viewed Noah and the Ark as a myth recant their doubts and embrace the Biblical narrative?

As exciting as it would be to have conclusive evidence that the Durupinar Formation is Noah's Ark, I don't believe the news would convert many unbelievers or turn doubters into supporters of Biblical truth claims. It reminds me of when the rich man asked Abraham to send Lazarus to rise from the dead and warn his five brothers. Abraham replied, "If they do not hear Moses and the Prophets, neither will they be convinced if someone should rise from the dead." (Luke 16:17-31) If we don't believe God's clear Word as the final answer, no amount of physical proof will change our minds.

I've recently been preaching through Genesis, and I've been disappointed to see how some trusted commentators appear to have adopted a different method of interpreting the first eleven chapters of Genesis. At times, I've also sensed some dismissiveness when I've advocated for a literal, historical, grammatical approach to Genesis 1, which leads to six literal days of creation and, consequently, a young earth. I've noticed similar reactions recently as we've worked through Genesis 6–9. Again, a natural, contextual, grammatical, and historical reading of the text points to a global flood that covered the entire planet, destroying all land-dwelling creatures, birds, and humans who were not on the ark.

Other interpretations understand the flood as local, regional, or "universal" only from Noah's perspective. While these views differ, they share a common conclusion: the flood was not globally destructive and did not fundamentally reshape the earth's geological and topographical features.

I've often observed that those committed to deep time are inclined to reject a global flood. I believe one reason is that accepting a global flood would require reconsidering whether much of the geological column formed rapidly by a catastrophic event rather than primarily through millions of years of erosion, death, disease, and other natural processes.

Below are some brief biblical and apologetic reasons for believing in a global flood:

Reason #1: Large Barge

The first reason we should understand the flood as a global flood is the ark's massive size. According to Genesis 6:15, the Ark was to be 450 feet long and 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. Imagine a boat stretching across an entire football field, including both end zones, and then continuing another 90 feet. It had three decks, so it had nearly two full football fields of floor space.

If the Flood was local or regional in Mesopotamia, why would God have instructed Noah to build such a large barge? What would be its purpose? After all, Noah and his family could have used those 75-100 years it took to construct the ark to relocate until after the Flood, and perhaps even taken some animals with them.

Reason #2: Big Words

In Genesis 6-9, the Holy Spirit uses extensive language and piles up exhaustive words, like "all flesh"(6:13, 6:17,7:21, 9:11, 9:15), "under the whole heaven/whole earth" (6:17, 7:19, 8:9) "all high mountains,"( 7:19, 7:20, 8:5) "everything on dry land/died" (6:17,7:4, 7:22, 7:23, 8:21) and "only Noah" that sound like a repetititive drum-beat about the global, physical, and geographical scope of the Flood.

Those who believe in a local or more regional flood push back, noting that there are some places in the Old Testament where "all the earth" doesn't mean literally "all the earth" (eg., Genesis 41:57). However, context is always key. While there is room for understanding that not every human in "all the earth" came to Egypt during the famine, that reference doesn't repeatedly emphasize the literal nature of "all the earth" like Genesis 6-9 does.

The question should be asked to the local flood advocate, "What would God have said if He was trying to describe a global flood?" The obvious answer seems to be, "exactly what He said." "What more can He say than to you He hath said?"

Reason #3: Long Stay

When you do the calculation, it’s a bit staggering. Noah and his family were on the ark for over a year! You read that correctly! Imagine a family vacation where you are in the same cottage for over 365 days! In fact, the text specifically says the Noah family floated for 5 months and docked for 7 months! Has anyone in world history ever hunkered down for a year due to local flooding? A local or regional flood makes the Scriptures' narrative of a 365-day Ark trip seem incredulous. 

Reason #4: Jesus’ and Peter’s Words

It’s not wise to conflict with the historicity of Genesis 1-11, especially because 18 of the 27 New Testament books reference those chapters' reliability and accuracy by quoting from them. In fact, Jesus and Peter are recorded as apparently supporting the global language of the flood. Jesus said in Matthew 24:36-39 that the flood “swept them all away” and “so will be the coming of the Son of Man.” Luke’s account records Jesus as saying, “... and the flood came and destroyed them all.” (Luke 17:27b) And Peter says that God “... did not spare the ancient world, but…he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly.”

If the Lord Jesus compared His Second Coming with the Flood, if it was only a local flood, wouldn’t Jesus be saying His Second Coming will be just a regional event as well?  In addition, Peter’s use of a “world-wide” flood would be an exaggeration if it were only a local event. 

Reason #5: Air-Tight Promise

God made a covenant with Noah, his sons, their children, grandchildren, and with every living creature, including the birds, that He would never “cut off all flesh by a flood” and that “…never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.” (Genesis 9:8-17) God went even further. He said He would place a rainbow in the sky to remind Him of this promise.

If the promise was about a local flood, hasn’t God either forgotten or broken His promise? There have been countless local and regional floods in the past 4000 years that have killed millions. China and South Asia have been hit hard, particularly. How is God’s promise trustworthy if this was a promise about no more local floods? There have been plenty. Instead, the language of the covenant seems to match the extent of the judgment: a global flood.

 Reason #6: Caged Birds

“So the LORD said, ‘I will blot out man whom I have created from the face of the land, man and animals and creeping things and birds of the heavens, for I am sorry that I have made them.” (Genesis 6:9) Why did God include animals that were capable of flight, and long-distance flight as well? Birds travel farther, faster, and longer than most of us imagine. For instance, the godwit can fly from Alaska to Tasmania (almost 8,500 miles!) in 11 days, nonstop! If the flood was local or limited to the Mesopotamian region, most birds could have flown clear in a few days. If birds can easily cross an ocean in a week, why would they need to be caged in a boat? Again, the Ark really only makes sense if there was nowhere to fly to. Further, in chapter eight, after being docked on a mountain in the Ararat range, Noah sent out a raven and a dove to try to learn more about the water level. “…and sent forth a raven. It went to and fro until the waters were dried up from the earth. Then he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters had subsided from the face of the ground. But the dove found no place to set her foot, and she returned to him to the ark, for the waters were still on the face of the whole earth.”

Noah was on the ark for about a year. Local flooding doesn’t keep a bird off of dry land for a year. If a bird can fly from Alaska to Australia nonstop, and the Flood was only local or regional, the birds certainly didn’t need an Ark to be safe. They just needed 72 hours.  

Reason #7: The Ark's Mission

In Genesis 6:20b, God tells Noah the purpose of the Ark: "Of the birds according to their kinds, and of the animals according to their kinds, of every creeping thing of the ground, accoridng ot its kind, two of every sort shall come in to you to keep them alive. And then again in 7:3, "and seven pairs of the birds of the heavens also, male and female, to keep their offspring alive on the face of all the earth." The Ark's purpose was obviously to save Noah and his family from the deluge, but it was also commissioned to safely bring the animals onto dry land after the flood so they could repopulate the world.

For a local flood that would kill land animals in the surrounding region, there would be no reason to house all of these animals. Even if the local flood wiped out all the local animals, surrounding regions could repopulate the flooded area.

Reason #8: Stones and Bones

The size and scope of the flood suggest plenty of evidence in the geological record (stones) and the fossil record (bones) confirming a global cataclysmic flood. That's what we find. The Scriptures describe a worldwide catastrophe that physically changed the earth. The descriptors are so epic that we expect to see features in the rocks, such as sediment layers, fossil graveyards, and mountain-building as a result of a global flood. Again, that is what is found on every continent.

Local flood advocates generally believe in uniformitarianism. They believe the present interprets the past. Peter puts it this way, saying they believe that "all things continue as they were from the beginning" (II Peter 3:3-6). It assumes that the slow rates of erosion and deposition we see today go all the way back to the beginning.

Actually, Scripture teaches that the past interprets the present. A planet-altering event happened in the past: a global flood. The geological and fossil record affirms a cataclysmic global flood. The earth contains abundant evidence of catastrophic water-driven processes in both the stones and the bones.

Affirmation of Scripture's clear teaching of a global flood is the most natural reading of the vocabulary, plot, and chronology of the Biblical Text.

The soundest position is confidence in Scripture's teaching of a global flood event that changed our world forever.

Even if the formation in Eastern Turkey turns out to be the real ark, the only real change of mind and heart will come from confidence in the Bible, not discoveries or scientific theories.

Do you believe these things?

"Jesus said to him, 'Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." (John 20:29)