It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Arcaheological evidence of Noah's ark, the red sea crossing, Sodom and Gomorrah and more....

page: 3
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by XplanetX
 


just so you know - I edited that post



No problem, because as I have already said, I do not care for what any man thinks if his thoughts are contrary to God.

I support Wyatt's work until he is thoroughly shown to be a fraud, which may never be the case if he was honest.

My question still stands, who do you promote?


edit on 13-10-2011 by XplanetX because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 05:04 AM
link   
reply to post by XplanetX
 


a thinking man might wonder – how come an atheist and “answers in genesis” are both singing from the same sheet when it comes to rong Wyatt?

Maybe you should do a bit of checking to see just what’s wrong with Wyatt and his evidence – or do you not care that you might be promoting a fraud (perhaps winning souls by deception is ok in your book?)

Or is this stubbornness to consider other possibilities about Wyatt an ego thing for you now?



posted on Oct, 13 2011 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by XplanetX
 


a thinking man might wonder – how come an atheist and “answers in genesis” are both singing from the same sheet when it comes to rong Wyatt?

Maybe you should do a bit of checking to see just what’s wrong with Wyatt and his evidence – or do you not care that you might be promoting a fraud (perhaps winning souls by deception is ok in your book?)

Or is this stubbornness to consider other possibilities about Wyatt an ego thing for you now?



Replace wrong with right and I could make the exact same response to you, whose ego is bruised?

Is it possible that Wyatt is a fraud? Yes.

Do I think he is a fraud based on the available evidence? No.

Many people have attacked Wyatt but have failed to provide adequate evidence against his work and the witnesses of his work. Many witnesses have seen and physically travelled to the places of interest (eg Sodom & Gomorrah, Noah's Ark, Mt. SInai).

The only physical evidence that Wyatt has failed to provide is the Ark of the covenant. People have heavily disputed his claims regarding this particular artifact and fair enough. I actually take him at his word on this particular claim due to the proof of Christ's blood.

As one poster as previously mentioned:

LK 16:31 "He said to him, `If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.' "

The irony is that someone has risen from the dead: Jesus Christ.

...and yet you still do not believe.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I thought you need at least a BA in Archeology to perform a dig... Wyatt didn't have one. So how did he do all these digs? Illegally? Was it verbal permission? Where are his finds if someone wants to examine them? Oh and the so called Anchor Stones were pre-christian, i.e. pagan markers.

Will look at videos later.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 07:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Engafan
 


Engafan, I have to suppose that you were there when the anchor stones were new, or have taken the unproven opinion of some authority figure on this. Show your sources or shup up.



posted on Oct, 14 2011 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Engafan
I thought you need at least a BA in Archeology to perform a dig... Wyatt didn't have one. So how did he do all these digs? Illegally? Was it verbal permission? Where are his finds if someone wants to examine them? Oh and the so called Anchor Stones were pre-christian, i.e. pagan markers.

Will look at videos later.




I await your thoughts on the matter after you watch the video's.



posted on Oct, 15 2011 @ 05:55 AM
link   
I've been looking through the finds on his site and I am quite dubious. There is one relic that I know is not authentic, it has been proven to be a forgery. The ivory pomegranate has been proven to be a fraud.

Regarding his supposed discovery of the Ark of the Covenant, with no proof again this is dubious. If the Ark does still exist I think the most compelling claim of it's location is Axum Ethopia. The only one allowed within the fenced area is the High Priest of Axum. He cannot leave the small garden surrounding the chapel and is to name his successor on his deathbed.

The story of how the Ark made it's way there tells of Solomon's son Menelik bringing it there. There are references to it being located there that date back to at least the 12th century.

All things considered this is the most compelling evidence I've found to date.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join