By Magdy Abdalshafy
In this article:
The Ark of Noah is true, not a myth
The search of the Ark of Noah on Arrat as stated in the Bible came to nothing.
The Ark of Noah landed on Mount Judi as stated in the Quran
Judi was never among the Urratus mountains
Difference between the Quranic and the Biblical narration
The Ark of Noah. Where did it land on Judi Moubtain Or Arrat?
The Ark of Noah( note that Quran says " ship", this is confirmed by the fossilized shape found in Turkey) was considered a myth for a long time. The reason why it was considered a myth was the impossibility, as they think, that a global flood can't have happened. However the Holy Quran doesn't say it was a global flood but it states that flood destroyed the nation of Noah as they were rebellious. The narration of the bible says that the Ark landed on arrat, while Arrat was a volcanic mount that came into existence after the flood. Many attempts were made to find the Ark on Mount Arrat but all proved that the Ark is not on Arrat. However, and only by chance, a photo was taken by a Turkish pilot for Mount Judi and, on studying it, he realized that a ship-like object appear in the picture. However, an earthquake helped to make the lands fall down around the Ark making it appear clearly,
Many fervent missions were made to the site of the Ark, scientific procedures (such as carbon dating) were made to date the Ark and all proved that it is the Ark of Noah. So the Ark is on Mount Judi (also Codi) as mentioned in Quran and not on Arrat as stated in the Bible. We Muslims, as most Christian scholars, believe that many alterations were made into the Bible.
However, to avoid any criticism, the Christian scholars when talking about the site of the Ark, they say that it is in a site located south of Arrat, they don't name it for us. Moreover, they claim that Mount Judi was within the biblical borders of the kingdom of Uratu, while, historically, Mount Judi was never among the borders of the kingdom of Uratu.
We Muslims must believe that the Holy Book is a Divine Book but in the same time, as stated in many places in Quran, it was corrupted. christian scholars admit this fact and it is not difficult to discover it yourself; many contradictions, irratinalities, scientific words, sexual stories, corrupted doctrine about God and prophets infest the entire bible.However there are many parts in the Holy Book that are divine.
What about the Quran? Did it survive the ordeal of time?
Scientific knowledge and reasonong prove the Quran is entirely divine while the Holy Book was changed When faced with such newly discovered findings, christian apologetics say the Holy Book is not a scientific book. They are true but at least it should not contradict science.
The scientific flaws in the Bible prove that the Holy Book has been changed.
It is well established that the word of God is 100% correct, it is not 99% correct.
Here we, muslims, without hesitation, can say the Quran is the word of God and in the same time Christians can't claim this. Why then my dear Christian friend you still insist on following a religion that have been corrupted, if you accept Islam, you won't lose any beauties that are found in your religion because God is the source of all religions.
The landing location of the Ark in the Bible and the Quran
"…And on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat." Genesis 8:4
Genesis says that Noah's ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat and not the mount of Ararat.
Why mountains not a mountain
If we search in the free wikipedia about mountains of Ararat we find:
"It has two peaks: Greater Ararat (the tallest peak in Turkey, and the entire Armenian plateau with an elevation of 5,137 m/16,854 ft) and Lesser Ararat (with an elevation of 3,896 m/12,782 ft).
And from this will assume that the mountains of Ararat meant these two summits Greater Ararat and Lesser Ararat, but after that the scientists have found Noah's Ark on Mount of Judi, they try to annex Mount Judi to Mountains of Arrat.
Allah said in Quran11:44" And it was said, "O earth, swallow your water, and O sky, withhold [your rain]." And the water subsided, and the matter was accomplished, and the ship came to rest on the [mountain of] Judiyy. And it was said, "Away with the wrongdoing people."
Here Quran says that Noah's Ark rested on Mount Judi.
Archeology didn't find the Ark on Arrat
A lot of scientific campaigns led by the most qualified geologists and scientists aided with the most sophisticated instruments have made many successive attempts to find the Ark of Noah on Arrat mountains as mentioned in the bible, the following scientific websites that bases its articles on scientific reports show the results:
1- In 1829 the professor of philosophy at University of Dorpat Freidrich Parrott climbing Mount Ararat in search of the ship
Dr. Friedrich Parrot, with the help of Khachatur Abovian, was the first explorer in modern times to reach the summit of Mount Ararat,
Dr. Parrot did not claim to actually see the ark. The best he could suggest was that the ark might be buried under ice and snow on the saddle between the double peak. Considering that the ice is 300 feet thick
Trust bible Website
Though the site is mainly concerned with preaching Christianity, it said "Noah's ark is not entombed in ice on Mt. Ararat as claimed by some"
3- He was followed by the same way the historian and professor at the University of Oxford, James Bryce in 1876. …On this trip, he found wood on Great Ararat although he did not make a huge deal about it as he had a private idea about how it could have arrived on the mountain.
The former astronaut James Irwin
4- In 1982 the former astronaut James Irwin had a new campaign to Mount of Ararat to search for Noah's Ark...On two occasions he led expeditions to Mount Ararat in Turkey in search of Noah's Ark. In 1982, he reached the 16,946-foot summit but fell on the glacier, suffering severe leg and face lacerations. He had to be carried down on horseback. A year later, he surveyed the summit by airplace, looking down for possible remains of the Ark, which according to the Book of Genesis, came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. "It's easier to walk on the moon," he said. "I've done all I possibly can, but the Ark continues to elude us
Many Attempts but in Vain
5- "And since 1982, dozens climbing Mount of Ararat but they failed to find anything.
Because of Soviet complaints that explorers were spying, the region was off limits until 1982. Since then, scores of climbers have scaled the mountain but failed to substantiate what the object is. In 1997 the U.S. government released images taken by its Air Force in 1949 that were believed by some to show a structure covered by ice on Mount Ararat. These photographs had reportedly been kept in a government file labeled "Ararat Anomaly." However, experts deemed the images inconclusive…For years, attempts by McGivern to have satellite images taken of Mount Ararat failed. In the summer of 2003 he recruited Digital Globe, a commercial satellite-imagery firm, to try again. This time, a heat wave that hit Europe that year had partially melted the snowcap on top of the mountain.
McGivern claimed the new images showed a large structure, with vertical beams and one horizontal beam, buried on the mountain. He said he was 98 percent sure it was the ark.
Most experts, however, were skeptical. The object in the images could easily be a rock formation, they said, adding that some of the photos were nonscientific and fuzzy.
"It's very easy to get something that looks like it's man-made [in these images]. But once you get there, it turns out to be nothing," said Lorence Collins, a retired geology professor at California State University at Northridge and an expert on photo-geology. "It's simply hopeful thinking ".
Sixty years of Research
A high amount of expeditions in the past 60 years tried to find remnants of the ark inside the glaciers upon the mountain with an elevation of over 5000 meters / 15000 ft. Again and again, there were reportings about wooden structures or remains under the ice - but nothing could have been certainly proved. Some researchers are now assuming that nobody is able to find anything, because searches took place on the wrong location .
John Morris Geological researche
John Morris Geological researcher, Geological researcher John Morris says''
Much information has been gathered over the last 40 years or so which indicates that the remains of Noah's Ark may still exist on Mt. Ararat in eastern Turkey. Numerous expeditions, including many which I have personally lead, [sic] have attempted to discover the Ark's whereabouts, but to date none have been completely successful. Some possible sites and claims have been checked out and disproved unfortunately, there are two individuals which feel otherwise, and promote the site as the remains of Noah's Ark. Neither have geologic or archaeological training, and in their investigations both have used methods which are not reliable in gathering their data. Furthermore, they have not allowed others to see their data, preferring instead to make statements about the data only. Both can give convincing talks on the subject, and both have written books describing their experiences (not their data), but to my knowledge, all who have critically evaluated the site and/or the methods and reports of the two advocates are convinced that both are mistaken. In fact, many of their claims are in direct conflict with facts I and others have gathered at the site."
Then he ended his speech by saying " Until then, the search will continue as He leads and allows, with several efforts being planned for the summer of 1990. Christians are asked to pray for the preparation, funding, safety and success of these efforts, and that hearts will respond once the Ark is revealed"
Dr. Charles Wales' Attempts
Dr. Charles Wales led four missions to explore Mount of Ararat.
A veteran explorer to the region and a neuropsychiatries by trade, Willis has led four expeditions up Mt. Ararat, the traditional site of the landing of Noah's Ark. Yet, the results of his investigation on that mountain, as well as years of research into historical sources, suggested to him that Ararat is not the mountain of Noah or the Ark
Scientific Reports say that the Ark of Noah is not on the Arrat Mountains.
Satellite pictures show no Ark landing on Arrat Mountains.
Please note that all attempts were made to search for the Ark were on Mountains of Arrat.
The Ark has been found on Judi exactly as the Quran says
In fact the distance between the Judi Mount, where the Ark actually landed and found, and Mount Arrat is estimated to be (157-200 miles)
Christians apologetics still insist that the Ark landed on Arrat Mountain though all the attempts to find the Ark on the Arrat proved that it never landed on Arrat.
The Story of Finding the Ark
In 1959, Turkish army captain Llhan Durupinar discovered an unusual shape while examining aerial photographs of his country. The smooth shape, larger than a football field, stood out from the rough and rocky terrain at an altitude of 6,300 feet near the Turkish border with Iran.
This mountainous land was originally part of the Kingdom of Armenia, a country that is thousands of years old and often considered the "first Christian nation", until the Turks took it over at the beginning of the 20th Century.
Capt. Durupinar was familiar with the biblical accounts of the Ark and its association with Mount Ararat in Turkey, but he was reluctant to jump to any conclusions. The region was very remote, yet it was inhabited with small villages. No previous reports of an object this odd had been made before. So he forwarded the photographic negative to a famous aerial photography expert named Dr. Brandenburger, at Ohio State University.
Brandenburger was responsible for discovering the Cuban missile bases during the Kennedy era from reconnaissance photos, and after carefully studying the photo, he concluded: "I have no doubt at all, that this object is a ship. In my entire career, I have never seen an object like this on a stereo photo."
In 1960 the picture [above] was published in LIFE magazine under the heading of Noahs Ark? That same year a group of Americans accompanied Capt. Durupinar to the site for a day and a half. They were expecting to find artifacts on the surface or something that would be unquestionably related to a ship of some kind. They did some digging in the area but found nothing conclusive and announced to the anxiously waiting world that it appeared to be a natural formation.
Most of the global media turned away from the find and it became a non-story.
In 1977 Ron Wyatt visited the site. Obtaining official permission, Ron and others conducted more thorough research over a period of several years. They used metal detection surveys, subsurface radar scans, and chemical analysis -- real science -- and their findings were startling. The evidence was undeniable. This was the Ark of Noah.
#1 -- the Visual Evidence
The first part of the survey was to examine the object and take its measurements. The shape looked like the hull of a ship. One end was pointed as you would expect from bow [below: D] and the opposite end was blunt like a stern. The distance from bow to stern was 515 feet, or exactly 300 Egyptian cubits. The average width was 50 cubits. These were the exact measurements mentioned in the Bible.
On the starboard side (right) near the stern there were four vertical bulges protruding from the mud [B], at regular intervals, that were determined to be the "ribs" of the hull [see below]. Opposite to these, on the port side, a single rib [A] protrudes from the mud. You can see its curved shape very clearly. Surrounding it are more ribs, still largely buried in the mud, but visible upon close examination.
Remember that this object, if it is the Ark, is extremely old. The wood has been petrified. Organic matter has been replaced by minerals from the earth. Only the shapes and traces of the original wood remain. Perhaps this is why the expedition in 1960 was disappointed. They anticipated finding and retrieving chunks of wood, long since eroded.
From the position of the object in the middle of an obvious mudflow, it is obvious that the object slid down more than a mile from its original location. Geologists believe it was originally over 1000 feet higher in the mountain and encased in a shell of hardened mud. They think that an earthquake in 1948 cracked the mud shell and revealed the structure. This is confirmed by stories from the surrounding villagers who tell of its "sudden appearance" around that time.
Biblical accounts of the Ark describe it as having as many as six levels. The assumed shape of the Ark seems consistent with the bulge [C] in the middle of the object. In fact, as we will soon learn, radar scans of the structure suggest that this bulge is the collapsed debris of these levels.
Although most people think of the Ark as being rectangular, that only applies to the top decks. The sleek shape of the hull is necessary to enable the huge ship to remain stable in the water and survive tremendous waves.
#2 -- Ground Penetrating Radar
The human eye needs to see reflected light to recognize an object. To visualize what remains below the earth, scientists use microwaves which can penetrate the ground and bounce back when they hit something solid. This technique is commonly used to locate oil and other minerals. Called Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), the apparatus is made from an antenna that transmits, then listens to receive the "echo" and prints the result on a piece of paper. The delay and strength of this echo tell the geologists how solid and at what depth the objects are under the earth.
The team of geologists didn't scan the entire object. Instead, they marked out lines that crossed the object with yellow tape. Then they dragged the antenna (about the size of a lawnmower) over the lines and watched the output on the paper recorder. When they got a strong "hit" -- meaning there was something solid underneath -- they would record the position on the tape [above]. Later, when they made a map of the object, the tape and the location of the "hits" they realized that there was indeed a structure underneath the mud.
"This data does not represent natural geology. These are man made structures. These reflections are appearing too periodic... too periodic to be random in that type of natural space." -- Ron Wyatt of SIR Imaging team
The radar scans revealed this structure [above] under the mud. The symmetry and logical placement of these objects shows that this is unmistakably a man made structure, most likely the Ark of Noah.
#3 -- Artifacts retrieved from the Ark
Using the GPR, Ron Wyatt discovered an open cavity on the starboard side. He used an improvised drill to make core sample inside this cavity and retrieved several very interesting objects. Below you can see the artifacts which were sent for laboratory analysis. On the left is the bore hole [see below], followed by what turned out to be petrified animal dung, then a petrified antler and lastly a piece of cat hair.
Even more amazing artifacts were found
Perhaps the most significant find from the Ark itself is a piece of petrified wood. When this was first found it appeared to be a large beam. But upon closer examination it is actually three pieces of plank that have been laminated together with some kind of organic glue! This is the same technology used in modern plywood. Lamination makes the total strength of the wood much greater than the combined strength of the pieces. This suggests a knowledge of construction far beyond anything we knew existed in the ancient world.
Tests by Galbraith Labs in Knoxville, Tennessee, showed the sample to contain over 0.7% organic carbon, consistent with fossilized wood. The specimen was once living matter.
Examination reveals the glue oozed from the layers. The outside of the wood appears to have been coated with bitumen.
Even more surprising were laboratory analyses which not only revealed that the petrified wood contained carbon (proving it was once wood) but there were iron nails [above right] embedded in the wood!
We like to imagine that humanity evolved in a neat sequence of eras, each named after the technology that was discovered. We have the Stone Age (where man developed arrows and stone tools), the Bronze Age (where metals were combined and heated to make tools and household items) and lastly the Iron Age (where iron and steel objects were made by heating iron ore and adding other material -- like charcoal -- to strengthen it). The Iron Age is usually placed at 1200-1000 BC, yet we have iron nails being used in this extremely old construction.
But wait... there's more!
The most surprising find was discovered with sensitive metal detectors. The team located several strong "hits" that, when dug up, revealed large disc shaped rivets. From simple observation of the metal it was possible to see where the rivet had been hammered after being inserted through a hole [below].
If rivets being used in ancient construction doesn't impress you, this surely will.
An analysis of the metal used to make the rivets revealed that they were a combination of iron (8.38%), aluminum (8.35%) and titanium (1.59%). Remember these trace metals have survived petrification and so do not indicate the exact content in the original material. (see Report from Galbraith Labs)
We know the aluminum was incorporated in the metallic mixture because it does not exist in metallic form in nature. This implies an extremely advanced knowledge of metallurgy and engineering. Characteristics of an iron-aluminum alloy have been investigated in The Russian Chemical Bulletin (2005) and reveal that this alloy forms a thin film of aluminum oxide which protects the material from rust and corrosion. The addition of titanium would provide added strength. This seems to have worked. The rivets have survived from antiquity!
The surrounding area has more surprises
Several miles from the location of the Ark, huge stones were discovered, some standing upright while others lying on the ground. These stones, weighing many tons, have holes carved in them. Scientists have determined that they were anchors and the holes would have been their attachment to a ship with hemp rope.
Often these stones will have crosses carved in them, from centuries ago when pilgrims made the journey to visit the Ark. Yes, the Ark was well known in the Middle Ages and even before. And its location was recorded in many historical documents.
The huge anchors would have been suspended from the keel of the ship. This was a common practice among ancient mariners to stabilze a heavy ship and ensure that the bow is always facing the on-coming waves. A "top heavy" ship, such as the Ark, could easily be capsized by a wave approaching from the side. This is yet further proof that Noah's Ark was a reality and that it has indeed been found in Turkey.
After Noah's Ark landed
When Dr. Brandenburger originally examined and enlarged the photographs of the "strange object" in Turkey, he also saw hundreds of ancient foundations in the region, suggesting to him that this might have been the first town established after the flood, as described in the Bible.
Now their settlement extended from Mesha as you go toward Sephar, the hill country of the east. -- Genesis 10:30
Archaeological teams have found many ruins and ancient graves. Many human ribs have been excavated and sent to laboratories for dating. In the midst of this alleged "first city" of Noah, there is an unusual and prominent structure, about 10 feet in diameter, that many believe to be the altar on which Noah made his first sacrifice.
Noah's Ark has been found on Judi, not on Arrat
However Christian sources always claim that the Ark was found 200 miles( other sources make the distance far shorter) south of Arrat but they are always hesitate to tell us what is the name of that area which is in the south of Arrat.
We come to the published the scientific research in order to know where the ship rested.
The Real Noah's Ark
The ark rests upon Cesnakidag (or Cudi Dagi) Mountain, which is translated as "Doomsday" Mountain. There is no reason to assume it is a more likely candidate for the resting place of the ark, instead it is a less likely candidate. The ark came to rest in the mountains of the ancient country of Urartu, not on Mt. Ararat.
The site researched by Ron Wyatt is 18.2 miles south of Mount Ararat
An article then appeared in the September 5th, 1960, Life magazine, shown above, revealing a very impressive aerial photo of an extremely large boat-shaped object, plus two photos taken by the expedition. Seventeen years later in 1977, Mr. Wyatt made his first of 24 trips to the ark, and he was impressed that this really was the remains of Noah's Ark! In the research he performed over the next 15 years, Mr. Wyatt successfully performed metal detection tests and subsurface radar scans of the site, and he proved this site really IS the mud-and-lava covered remains of Noah's Ark
The ark rests in the direction of the sign, up on "Doomsday Mountain"
The ark rests on Cesnakidag Mountain, which is interpreted as "Doomsday" Mountain
Researcher Ron wyatt said
There, on a mountain 20 miles south of Mt. Ararat, the biblical landfall of Noah's Ark
( please note they have dropped one zero from the number 200, also they don't tell us what is the name of that mountain that lies south of Mt. Arrat)
parentcompany.com , The Search for Noah's Ark
…Until recently planes and helicopters have not been allowed to fly around the mountain, which makes the search for the ark extremely difficult. It is near Al Judi, that the ark is reportedly resting.
The ship of Noah once has landed: At the top of Mount Cudi
Mount Cudi — True Mountain of Noah's Ark
Journal: Bible and the Spade
Volume: BSPADE 19:4(Fall 2006)
Author: Bill Course and Gordon Franze
Article: Mount Cudi- True Mountain of Noah Ark
Mount Cudi — True Mountain of Noah's Ark
Bill Crouse and Gordon Franz
(A defense of the Cudi Dagh site has been published previously by Bill Crouse in Archaeology and Biblical Research vol. 5, #3, Summer 1992; TJ vol. 15(3); and in The Explorers of Ararat, edited by B.J. Corbin, chapter 7.)
For its historical claims the first eleven chapters of Genesis are possibly the most attacked section of the entire Bible, and the story deemed most implausible, without a doubt, is the story of Noah's Ark. That there could be such a great flood, a ship of 450–500 feet in length containing pairs of every air-breathing animal in the land, and only eight survivors, is usually treated by most critics as the equivalent of a nursery tale for children. Hence, it's no secret that theological liberals view the Biblical story of Noah's Ark as "the impossible voyage,"1 and we suspect, for many evangelicals, the search for Noah's Ark constitutes "the impossible quest."2 Though evangelicals fully believe that the Flood was a historical event, the attempt to discover the Ark's remains stretches credulity. The whole issue of the search for Noah's Ark is not helped by the fact that its "discovery" is frequently announced by a press that is not only gullible, but also enables the spread of sensational stories by indulging those looking for a moment of publicity.
All would agree that the discovery of the Ark's remains would be a find unprecedented in the history of archaeology. Finding an artifact from antediluvian times would be second to none, with the potential to alter the currents of thinking in several disciplines. Nevertheless we do make such a claim, as we believe the German geologist, Dr. Friedrich Bender, discovered remains of Noah's Ark of the Biblical Flood story in 1953. His scientific test results, coupled with other historical studies presented here, give credence to the idea that the final berth of Noah's ship has, in fact, been located. (See the Bender article later in this issue.)
The modern search for Noah's Ark began in 1948 when an alleged eyewitness claimed he stumbled onto the Ark high on the snowcap of Mt. Ararat (Smith 1950: 10). Since then others have made similar claims. Based on these alleged eyewitness accounts, many expeditions have been launched, innumerable hours have been spent in research, and large sums have been spent trying to verify what many critics said was a waste of time.
Middle East Explorer , Mount Judi
…in the 1980s, adventurer and self-styled archaeologist Ron Wyatt and his colleague David Fasold claimed to have discovered Noah's Ark at Durupinar, some 20 miles from Mt Ararat; a nearby mountain has subsequently been claimed to be Mt Cudi, the Turkish equivalent of Judi
Has Noah's ark been found in Turkey?
Noah's ark is not entombed in ice on Mt. Ararat as claimed by some you can visit the remains of Noah's ark today in Turkey, in the mountains of Ararat, 17 miles South of Mt. Ararat at the base of Mt. Judi (Al Judi), resting at 6000 feet. The mountains of Ararat refer to an area not a specific mountain
Again the correct Distance between Arrat and Judi is 200 miles
His research suggests the mountain known today as Mt. Cudi is the best candidate for the Ark landing and the subsequent settlement of Noah and his family. Here, too, he believes Noah died and was buried
Church of GOD
Church of God believes that Noah's Ark landed on Mt.Judi (Cudi) Allahu Akbar
A QUICK NOTE on NOAH'S ARK: Church of God believes that Noah's Ark landed on Mt.Judi (Cudi) in Northern Iraq near the border with Turkey around 2419 BC. Cudi is a 6000-7000 foot mountain with some flat promenades. Historical evidence establishes many sightings of it over the centuries. Not anything of the Ark remains today!! Various peoples plundered its wood since then. When the Flood receded, the lower mountain tops nearby were seen. The mountains of Ararat & others could NOT be seen 200 miles away. After the dry land was seen, volcanic or earthquake activity pushed up the mountains of Ararat, which are volcanic. There was an earthquake under Ararat last century that destroyed a monastery made of hard wood that created the Ahora Gorge. Church of God believes an expedition should be made to Mt.Cudi & its environs to find the Ark's landing spot. Church of God can not finance this expedition, but we still pronounce its need. (The US military knew by the 1970s that Noah's Ark was not on Mt. Ararat.) We also will encourage until accomplished the building of an exact replica of the Ark as a memorial to prove to the world the actuality & truth of the Bible. An exact replica of the Ark should be built & towed out into the Persian Gulf to prove the Ark could float & provide for Noah & the animals for 376 days. The Ark was viable; it did hold ALL those animals. THERE WAS A FLOOD!
The US military knew by the 1970s that Noah's Ark was not on Mt. Ararat
Noah's Ark Search
One big reason why Cudi has become more popular recently is that a geologist, Dr. Friedrich Bender of Germany, found bits of wood containing asphalt on the summit of Cudi under 0.8-1.0 meters in depth In 1953. These fragments were carbon-dated around 1971 to 6,500 years before the present time. Dr. Willis' and Bill Crouse's theory is that this wood was part of Noah's Ark
On his page on Wikipedia Ron Wyatt says:
Noah's Ark (the Durupınar site, located 18.25 miles south of Mount Ararat)
Again it is not Arrat but Judi Mount, I wonder why they always say Arrat, why don't they openly Gudi(RED line is mine)
Cudi page on Wikipedia says:
In the 1980s, adventurer and self-styled archaeologist Ron Wyatt and his colleague David Fasold claimed to have discovered Noah's Ark at Durupınar, some twenty miles from Mt. Ararat near a mountain locals called Cudi Dağı
Mount Ararat or Mount Judi
We quote the following excerpts:
"Where did Noah's Ark land? The Bible says: "the mountains of Ararat" .... The Qur'an says: "the heights" (The Quran uses a proper noun to refer to the mountain, some Quran expounders, being unable to determine the meaning of the word, thought that its meaning is heights). Which one? Are they the same place or are they different? Is the Ark at both of these locations "
"Noah's Ark has been found on the Turkish-Iranian border, 32 kilometres from Mount Ararat, according to the leader of a team of scientists that has been investigating the site for six years"
"At 170 metres long and 45 metres wide, it conforms almost exactly to the 300 cubit by 50 cubit boat that God told Noah to build, according to Genesis 6 in the Bible"
""It is a man-made structure and for sure it is Noah's Ark."
"The site is directly below the mountain of Al Judi, named in the Qur'an as the Ark's resting place.
There is a mountain named Judi. There is a mountain named Ararat. They are both located within the bounds of the Biblical region of Ararat (Urartu). It is very possible that both the Bible and the Qur'an speak in unison on this issue. Could it be that both Mount Ararat and Mount Judi are the same location? As you can see, some of today's authors use the two words and locations interchangeably regarding the location of the Ark
The biggest site says the Ark has been found on Judi
This is the biggest site deal with topics regarding the Ark of Noah
This site runs its discussion without bearing in minds what the Quran says.
It only refers to Genesis when talking about the dimensions described in the holy book and the one found.
It also compares between the Ark and the most ancient ones discovered
The site gives some satellite pictures in which you can see Arrat mountain clearly covered with ice while there is an arrow pointing to the place where the ship landed and the town where Noah is supposed to have lived.
This site is dedicated to bringing information to light about the location and nature of Noah's Ark and the ancient city of Naxuan
This is a zoomed in section of the actual 1959 Turkish Air Force mapping photograph
It is the ship of Noah
The dimensions of the Ark-mold shape at Uzengili on the slopes of the mountain called locally Cudi Dagi (pronounced Judi in Turkish), fit precisely into a 50 x 300 square-measure rectangle using the 22 inch cubit.
The south of Mount Arrat is Judi Mount
This slide show is designed to give you strong visual evidence that the remains of the ark of Noah lie on a mountain 17 miles south of Mount Ararat, in eastern Turkey. The ark ruins are situated in the "mountains of Urartu" ( hary urartu), as recorded in the Bible in Genesis 8:4. The very popular Mount Ararat will never produce an "ark of Noah," unless there were two Noahs and two arks. All of the pertinent evidence for Noah's ark and his post flood city "Mesha," ( later called Naxuan ), is found on this mountain, named anciently "Cordu," (which means "Mountain of the Kurds" ).
The Ark of Noah's final impression is located in the narrowest part of an earthslide at 6,200 feet above sealevel, on a mountain in eastern Turkey, about a mile west of the Turkish / Iranian border and 17 miles south of Mount Ararat.
The great Noah's Ark ruin was discovered in modern times in May of 1948 by local Kurdish-Turkish farmer Reshit Sarihan after a series of three earthquakes shook apart the surrounding loose and expansive soils that had entrapped it for many centuries. Higher up by 1,200 feet elevation and a mile east by southeast, on this mountain which is called by the local Kurds, "Mashur" ( also known as "Cudi Dag" but pronounced "Judi Da" in Turkish - which means "mountain of the Kurds" )
Another source says:
Here we see another artist's rendition, based on the evidence, and the shape of the mountain, precisely how the ark would have landed on Mt. Cudi pronounced "Judi" (the "mountain of the Kurds)
Turkish Military Map
the location of the mountain of the Kurds Cudi Dagi some 12-14 miles east, where the ark of Noah came to final rest
My Rebuttal to the Claim that Judi Mount can also be Arrat Mount
Our Christian scholars friends always find themselves obliged to wrestle with science in order to prove that the Bible is 100% the word of God, it is Ok but in cases or in points of indifferences between Quran and Bible, we Muslims should defend the authenticity of the Holy Quran. We Even claim that Quran corrects the Bible.
The Holy Book scientists propagate that the Ark of Noah was found on Arrat. The most honest among them say that the Ark was found (200 miles, other sources say 32 miles, other sources says 170 miles, other sources says 20 miles) but they always insist on not telling us what the name of this mount is.
However , when faces with the scientific truth, they say Mount Judi was within the Borders of Uratu kingdom and all the mountains in the kingdom can be called Arrat. However the kingdom of Uratu hadn't been there in the time when Moses wrote Genesis.
The Bible is supposed to be God's word but it was altered, the Holy Book itself says that it was changed:
32Then took Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the scribe, the son of Neriah; who wrote therein from the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book which Jehoiakim king of Judah had burned in the fire: and there were added besides unto them many like words.
The Holy Quran says as regard the fact that it correct the bible: the Book in truth, confirming that which preceded it of the Scripture and as a criterion over it.(5:48)
Either Moses was not the writer of Genesis or the revelation mistakenly determined the place where the Ark landed but we always believe that God' revelation is 100% correct.
Noah's Ark Search website says
From Assyrian texts, Urartu is known to have existed from about the late 13th century BC to the 9th century BC as a loose federation of tribes near Lake Van and the Araxes river, and thus near the traditional Mount Ararat (Agri Dagh)
Memedu.dk website says that Moses wrote the book of Genesis in the 15th century BC while tribes of Ararat found in this place at the 13th century BC, this means that Moses wrote Genesis 200 years before this tribes formed a kingdom.
"From Assyrian texts, Urartu is known to have existed from about the late 13th century BC to the 9th century BC as a loose federation of tribes. However, if one takes a conservative view of Moses writing Genesis in the 15th century BC rather than the 13th century BC, then Urartu would have been known even in that era. The Urartian Kingdom existed from the 9th century BC until the 6th century BC when it was destroyed by the Medes and vanished from history, only to be rediscovered in the archaeology of the late 1800s and early 1900s. Thus there exists the possibility of a mis-interpretation of Genesis by post-Christian writers and Armenians restricting the Ark's landfall to the smaller Araxes valley area including Mount Ararat rather than the larger Urartian region or "mountains of Urartu" as described by Moses in Genesis. However, some of this is speculation since there are no cross-references in 15th century BC writing so no one really knows exactly where Moses was referring to when he stated that the ark came to rest on the "mountains of rrt"
"no one really knows exactly where Moses was referring to when he stated that the ark came to rest on the "mountains of rrt"
swau.edu website says
Kingdom of Urartu has been stated through Jeremiah, and any mountain found in this kingdom will take the name of Ararat.
Ararat was the Hebrew version of the name, not of the mountain but the country around it, the old Armenian homeland, whose name at other times and in other tongues appears variously as Erirath, Urartu, etc. The prophet Jeremiah (LI,27), writing in 600 BC speaks of ‘the kingdom of Ararat,' which kingdom at that time called itself Urartu. Hence, the ‘Mountains of Ararat' may mean any part of the tangled mountain mass of the country. The Armenians never called the colossus of the range, Ararat; to them that mighty peak was ‘Masis
At the time Moses wrote Genesis, Agri Dagh was not within the kingdom of Ararat (Urartu), but the area containing Jebel Judi was (see fig. 2).
Although archeology has brought to light some remains from the 3rd and 2nd millenia B.C. from the area we call the Kingdom of Urartu (Plotrovsky, 1969); "there is at present no sound evidence attesting to the existence of The Kingdom [of] before the ninth century B.C".
"Most of the reports mention Mount Ararat as the place where the ark was seen. This should not be surprising since, as previously noted, to western minds, any mountain found to hold the ark would, by definition, be called Mount Ararat"
Either that Moses did not mean this area when he (Mountains Ararat) in Genesis, or that it actually is not Moses who wrote the books of Genesis.
Climatic conditions on Arrat
Mount Arrat is not the suitable place to find the Ark on it, it is all the time covered with ice, also the Turkish army has trained there, no single sign of the existence of the Ark was found there.
All About Turkey website says
Ararat is a dormant volcano; the last eruption was on June 2, 1840. At present the upper third of the mountain is covered with snow all the time
Ron Wyatt, the discoverer of the Ark rejected the claim that the Ark could be on Arrat for the same reasons, he says on his website:
Also to be considered are the volcanic eruptions which have occurred on Mt. Ararat. One of the most recent eruptions in the early 1800's
So we conclude that the impossibility of the existence or survival of the ship on Mount of Ararat because it is a volcanic mountain, and it was a volcanic eruption in 1840 could hide anything was present on the mountain.
The Christian scholars try hard to move Judi Mount to be included within the borders of the Uratu kingdom. However the maps of the Ancient world show that Mount Judi was never within the borders of the Uratu kingdom.
Noah's Ark Search website says
As well, there are serious concerns about whether Mt. Cudi was really in the biblical "mountains of Urartu/Ararat" (Genesis 8:4) at the time of the Genesis' writing. Even at the height of the Urartian Kingdom, Dr. Paul Zimansky demonstrated Urartu did not extend to Mount Cudi (Reference Zimansky's map in Ancient Ararat: A Handbook of Urartian Studies: 2) as reporduced in the Urartu borders graphic below. Especially note where the Urartian Archaeological Sites in orange are located, which shows that there are no known Urartian Archaeological Sites southwest or south of Lake Van near Mount Cudi
Check the map of the borders of the Kingdom of Urartu and you will find that mount of judi (cudi ) is out of the borders of the Kingdom of Urartu.
Comment ( Mount of Judi is not from Ararat mountains and the name Ararat mountains does not apply on it as it is sated in genesis, when scientists found Noah's Ark on Mount Judi, they did not have the right to say that Mount Judi is a one the mountains of Ararat)
also visit: www.knowmuhammad.com
courtesy to IbnMaryam website