World of the Bible Ministry Related News


Obama and the Definition of ‘Islamic’

By Caroline Glick November 4, 2014 , 11:00 am

Obama spoke with absolute certainty when he claimed that IS is not Islamic.

In his speech on September 11 announcing that the US would commence limited operations against Islamic State, US President Barack Obama insisted, “ISIL, [i.e. Islamic State] is not Islamic. No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIL’s victims have been Muslim.” To be sure, it is hard to see how any human faith can countenance IS’s actions. For the past several months, on a daily basis, new videos appear of IS fighters proudly, openly and wantonly committing crimes against humanity. This week for instance, a video emerged of an IS slave market in Raqqah, Syria, where women and girls are sold as sex slaves to IS fighters. Despite the glaring contradiction between divinity and monstrosity, the fact is that IS justifies every single one of its atrocities with verses from the Koran. IS referred to its sex slave market in Raqqah for instance as the “Booty Market… for what your right hands possess.” The phrase “what your right hands possess” is a Koranic verse (4:3) that permits the sexual enslavement of women and girls by Muslim men. Whether it is mainstream Islamic jurisprudence or not to embrace the enslavement of women and girls as concubines is not a question that Obama – or any US leader for that matter – is equipped to answer. And yet, Obama spoke with absolute certainty when he claimed that IS is not Islamic.

Obama speaks with similar conviction whenever he refers to Iran as “The Islamic Republic of Iran.” Obama’s consistent deference to the Iranian regime, exposed by his studious use of the regime’s name for itself whenever he discusses Iran indicates that at a minimum, he is willing to accept the regime’s claim that it is an Islamic regime. In other words, he is willing to accept that everything about the Iranian regime is authentic Islam. Similarly, if he is right that “no religion condones the killing of innocents,” then that means that the “Islamic Republic” similarly does not condone the killing of innocents. Of course, there is a problem here. In fact, there are two problems here. First, in its treatment of its own people, the Iranian regime condones and actively engages in the killing of innocents, the vast majority of whom are Muslims. The Islamic regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran invokes the Koran to justify its killing. Likewise, the political imprisonment, torture and general repression of Iranians from all faiths are justified in the name of Islam.

Consider two recent examples. On October 25, 27-year-old Reyhaneh Jabbari was hanged for allegedly killing a man who was trying to rape her. Jabbari was imprisoned for seven years prior to her execution. Although her suffering was a cause celebre for advocates of human rights in Iran, the regime didn’t care. In contempt of the international community, it murdered her a week ago. As her attorney Mohammed Mostataei explained at a conference held by UN Watch in Geneva last week, Jabbari was tried under Islamic law – the law of the land in the Islamic Republic of Iran. And under Islamic sharia law, intent in adjudication of criminal offenses is irrelevant. As a consequence, once regime inquisitors force a person to confess, he or she is doomed.

Forced confessions are the stock in trade for Iranian investigators. Last month, 25 women in Isfahan, Iran’s tourist capital, were reportedly victims of acid attacks. The women had acid thrown in their faces while they were driving in their cars. The public immediately suspected that they were targeted because their faces were not covered sufficiently to satisfy Islamic goon squads that drive around the city seeking – with the tacit if not open support of the regime – to terrorize the public into obeying their repressive, inhumane interpretation of Islam. On October 22, human rights activists in Iran held demonstrations against the acid attacks outside the judiciary building in Isfahan and outside the Iranian parliament in Tehran. In both instances, protesters insisted that there is no difference between the repression inherent in the radical Islam propagated by IS and that practiced by the Iranian regime. In both cities, demonstrators were attacked by regime forces with tear gas. Many were arrested. After the acid attacks were first reported, the Iranian parliament passed measures to strengthen the authority of the regime’s Basij shock troop squads to enforce repressive, misogynist Islamic dress codes on women and enforce other socially repressive aspects of the regime’s Islam. As Baron Alexander Carile of Barriew, a member of the British House of Lords and expert on terrorism explained last Friday in The Washington Times, “In essence, the regime responded to the acid attacks that have seriously injured 25 people so far by legitimizing the motives of their attackers.”

According to the UN, Iran executed 852 Iranians for various offenses from July 2013 through June 2014. This of course is just the tip of the iceberg. The vast majority of the regime’s killing is carried out by its proxies. IS’s persecution of those who have had the misfortune to fall under its control is a blight on the human race. And so is the persecution committed by Iran’s puppets – the Assad regime in Syria, and its Lebanese terror army Hezbollah. Since the Syrian civil war began three years ago, the Iranian-controlled regime has killed somewhere between 120,000 and 200,000 people. According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, nearly 10,000 of the dead are children, another 6,000 are women. Other groups place the number much higher. More than 2.14 million Syrians are now refugees in neighboring countries. Half of the refugees are children. Another 4.25 million Syrians are internally displaced. If it hadn’t been for Iran’s support for the regime, the vast majority of the victims of Syria’s civil war would still be alive and living in their homes.

Thanks to Iran and its Hezbollah army, Lebanon is on the brink of sharing Syria’s fate. Hezbollah has played a major role in the war in Syria, and over the years, with Iran’s total backing, it has murdered thousands of people in Lebanon, Israel and throughout the world. Hezbollah has trained sister Iranian supported or commanded terrorist groups like Islamic Jihad and Hamas. With the blessing, and often acting on direct orders from the Islamic Republic, these groups have killed hundreds of innocents. Like Hezbollah, Assad and the mullahs in Tehran, they have also repressed their own people in the name of their Islamic devotion.

And this brings us back to Obama and his insistence that IS is not Islamic, but the Iranian regime is Islamic. How are we to understand this seeming anomaly? Throughout his tenure in office, Obama has gone out of his way to mainstream Muslim extremists. This has taken the form of granting senior appointments to people aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood. For instance, amid a Congressional investigation into suspected leaks, Mohamed Elibiary, a senior fellow at the US Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council, resigned his position. Just before his resignation, Elibiary tweeted that the rise of the caliphate is “inevitable.” In 2004 he spoke at a conference in Dallas celebrating the legacy of Iranian dictator Ayatollah Khomeini. As Robert Spencer has reported, the conference was titled, “A Tribute to a Great Islamic Visionary.”

Moreover, Obama had befriended radical Islamic leaders who openly support terrorism, including Turkish dictator Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the emir of Qatar, Hamad bin Khalifa Al Thani. And of course, as we see more and more clearly each day, the centerpiece of Obama’s foreign policy has been appeasing the Islamic Republic of Iran in the hope of achieving détente with the nuclear weapons pursuing state sponsor of terrorism. The likes of IS, with its love of the video camera, discredit Obama’s narrative that radical, terror- supporting Muslims are peaceful. Since IS is openly evil, it is un-Islamic.

On the other hand, despite the fact that it is nearly as barbaric as IS, the Iranian regime is Islamic, because as far as Obama is concerned, it is good. And it is good because he wants to make a deal with the mullahs.

In other words, Obama is neither an expert on Islam, nor a man moved by moral indignation.

He opposes IS because IS makes it hard for him to defend Islam from bad public relations. And he coos about the “Islamic Republic of Iran” because he is dedicated to his mission of whitewashing and mainstreaming the regime born of an Islamic revolution.

Reprinted with author’s permission from The Jerusalem Post



Israel the Safest Country in the Middle East for Followers of Jesus

Israeli Jews and Christians call for action vs. persecuted believers in the Middle East
by Nicole Schiavi Jansezian, Travelujah---

While Christians and other ethnic minorities face brutal persecution and even death across the Middle East at the hands of Islamic terrorists, Israel is the safest country in the region for followers of Jesus.

And despite a war that ravaged Israel all summer, a record number of Christian tourists came to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles this past week during the weeklong Sukkot holiday.
 
The ICEJ's Feast gathering drew nearly 5,000 Christians from more than 80 countries this year, making it the largest Feast attendance in seven years. Prominent leaders of Jewish and Christian organizations took the occasion to call for action on behalf of the region's persecuted people.
 
Dignitaries including World Jewish Congress President Ron Lauder and Co-chairman of the Empowered21 Global Council and President of Oral Roberts University William M. Wilson joined ICEJ Executive Director Dr. Jürgen Bühler in signing a letter addressed to 120 world leaders.
 
"This letter gives an important voice to Christians who are being persecuted and even killed for their faith around the world, especially in the Middle East," Wilson said. "Most Christ followers in these difficult situations will not respond with violence and therefore need global governmental authorities to stand with them against these injustices."
 
Lauder has been outspoken about Jews needing to lend their support to persecuted Christians.




Noah, The Film: All Washed Up

by Randall Price

The pre-release advertising promoting the movie Noah made a point of stating that while the director took artistic license in the production it was still faithful to the biblical story. Early theater previews were carefully edited to appeal to people of faith, but this is the least biblical “biblical film” of all time! However, to be charitable, the bare outline of the Flood story is present, but after that artistic license has taken the film so far afield of anything resembling the Bible that it is offensive to people of faith. To say that the biblical story was watered down (pardon the pun) is much too mild. Those who know the Bible were aware of how little the script followed Scripture. Those who didn’t know the Bible still didn't know it when the final credits appeared. It is to the movie studio’s credit that they chose to even make a film with a biblical theme, but the torturous fiction that was the final cut partly written and directed by an atheist is a discredit to both the studio and the actors and is, in result, worse than having not made it at all. Remember the old adage of making a bottle of poison look nicer by removing the ugly skull and crossbones label and replacing it with one that read “essence of peppermint?” The bottle now looks pretty, but is even more deadly because of its deceptive label. To a generation that already rejects the Genesis account as pure fiction, mixing a little Bible with a film of impure fiction is even worse – and certainly more dangerous to faith. For those who have not seen the movie and may think my judgments too harsh, please consider the following.

The film presents the sole purpose of Noah and the Ark as the preservation of the innocent animals. The pre-Flood world is portrayed as barren and denuded as the result of human corruption. What could be more evil and deserving of judgment in ecologically-minded Hollywood? Therefore, as Noah interprets God’s purpose, mankind – all of mankind, including Noah and his family – are supposed to die so the new world can continue with only with an innocent animal population. The Ark has nothing to do with the salvation of mankind, but with its punishment. Noah was only chosen to save the animals, and he is so intent on fulfilling his task to see humanity destroyed that he announces to his family on the Ark that they must all die, for “the Creation is only safe when mankind is dead.” For this reason, when Noah learns that Shem’s wife is pregnant, he declares that he will murder her baby, if it is a girl, as soon as it is born! The ensuing drama aboard the Ark has Mrs. Noah trying to help her expectant kids escape, a crazed Noah stalking his newly born twin granddaughters, and Shem and Ham trying to kill their father (especially after he sets fire to the couple’s escape raft). Add to the drama the evil meat-eating king of the old world, Tubal-Cain, who sneaked on board and remained hidden throughout the voyage, only to finally die in a knife fight with Noah when the Ark lands and breaks in two.

In the end, Noah spares his family because of “love.” Mankind is not so bad after all, for as Mrs. Noah explains, “all the heart needs is love to be good.” God, who has remained silent through the drama on the Ark, despite Noah’s pleas for divine guidance, is shown to have stayed away because, as Noah’s adopted Cainite daughter (the wife of Shem who had been miraculously cured of bareness by a healing touch from Methuselah) states, God wanted to let Noah choose whether mankind should live or not. So, in spite of the ecological hype, it is about humanism in the end. The film closes with newly sober Noah brandishing his snake-skin phylactery (a relic from the serpent in the Garden of Eden) and telling his kids to be “fruitful and multiply” as a rainbow appears (sans the Noahic covenant).

Yet this summary reflects the best part of the film. To get the real flavor of the added fiction one must consider the four-armed giant rock men, who are actually imprisoned fallen angels (“Watchers”) created on the second day to help mankind and aid Noah by building the Ark. For their good works they get redeemed and taken to heaven (and their wings restored) in explosive shafts of light as the rain starts to fall, but only after slaughtering the masses of mankind who were trying to kill Noah and take over the Ark. At the same time Methuselah eats a berry and is killed in the first wave of water from the Flood (he did die in the same year that the Flood occurred, but not as a result of the Flood). On board the Ark Noah’s family pleads with him to let in the screaming people scratching on the door of the Ark because “there is room,” but Noah as judge and jury says there is no room for such people, and then follows this with the aforementioned announcement to those on the Ark that God wants all of them dead as well. If you ever wondered where the wood for the Ark came from, the film depicts a whole forest magically growing up around Noah’s family camped at Methuselah’s mountain from a seed from the Garden of Eden that Methuselah had been keeping all this time. And as for the innocent animals, they mostly come by the thousands (same species), mostly snakes, birds, and insects (more dramatic for the special effects guys), following a magic waterway that sprang from the Edenic seed and had spread over the world. Sadly, some species were made extinct on the Ark since Tubal-Cain kept himself alive by eating the animals on board the Ark. They were easy prey because Noah had drugged them all to sleep with sedative-laced incense. Other fictional elements include a Zohar stone that instantly bursts into flame when struck, no wives for Ham and Japheth so only six people in Noah’s family go on the Ark (though eight get off), big windows staying open during the Flood (compare Genesis 8:6) and the family running around on top of the Ark while it rides out the Deluge, and the inclusion of evolutionary development on the fifth day of Creation (which is implied in the succession of creatures and landscapes as lasting for millions of years).

The producers tried to keep these details secret from the faith-based public in order to not have a backlash from negative reviews that would affect the all important opening weekend box office. I learned about some of these details last year from a French graphic novel (which I was shown in Germany) upon which the film’s script was based. As far as I know this was not translated or released to the English-speaking market, presumably to prevent these fictional elements from getting out to the faith-based American audience. Now, the secret is out and it is hoped that informed audiences will, like Noah in the film, judge this parody of the biblical account, unworthy of cinematic salvation.



SYRIA – WMD CHEMICAL WARFARE

We here in Transglobal and your other friends in Israel have heard that many of our friends in America are concerned about the Civil War in Syria, the indiscriminate murder of civilians – particularly by poison gas and particularly innocent children – and the possibilities of this War spilling over into Israel and becoming regional.

What's happening in Israel concerning this  ?

Well, we are waiting to see what America's reaction will be to Syria using chemical weapons.(Many of these weapons are the infamous WMD -Weapons of Mass Destruction- which ex-President George Bush set out to destroy before they were moved undercover from Iraq to Syria).  Now that the British Parliament has decided that chemical warfare and WMD are “acceptable” (at least when others’ children are gassed and not the Brits and their children), can America be far behind? I hope that I am seriously wrong about President Obama's reaction to the use of chemical weapons, and that he will have the courage to take the opportunity of knocking out chemical weapons facilities in Syria , and also a few other Syrian strategic assets. All the better if this is done in conjunction with the French and/or any other Western Powers who will not fold and run.

 In the opinion of many Israelis this is what America will do;  and although it may result in Israel being attacked “in revenge” for America attacking Syria, we are in favor of destroying the Syrian WMD.  

Anyway, if someone would make the very serious mistake of attacking Israel with gas or other WMD it would definitely be their last such attack. The Israeli population is not in the same situation as Little England. We would destroy the attackers and everything and everyone around them. There would be no “proportionate” response to a chemical or WMD attack. It is within the living memory of every Israeli that just 65-70 years ago Six Million Jews in Europe were murdered, most by poison gas, by populations in Europe which were supposedly a lot more cultured than Radical Islamists. The difference is that the 6 million Jews presently in Israel have the means of defending themselves – and we will use those means at the first hint of an attack. 

It would be suicidal on a massive scale for any Arab and/or Islamist leader to try sending poison gas to Israel. We do not believe that they would , even with the totally irrational theology and philosophy of many Arabs and Islamists, they are nevertheless a very small minority which is “psychotically crazy” in Western terms: they would not be “allowed” or able to get their hands on the weapons and know-how to attack Israel. On the other hand, we have Biblical Prophecy foretelling of the “destruction of Damascus” .   The paragraph below is in an email from Pastor John Hessler. Thanks John.

[Many in the conservative side of the church have speculated for years about what will cause the fulfillment of Isaiah 17:1  "Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins."  Like Isaiah, Jeremiah also predicts the destruction of Damascus "in one day", commenting that its walls are ablaze (stone walls).  Jer 49:23 cites Hamath and Arphad (the scene of much of the last 2.5 years of civil war and carnage) as an area of battle. As terrible a thought as it is to consider so many destroyed in a nuclear inferno (seemingly the only cause of such a sudden and complete inferno), I see it as an Israeli response to a Hezbollah-generated attack on Israel with WMDs.  For that matter, it may turn out to be their own WMDs that cause the destruction!  Whenever it happens, it certainly seems that he time of fulfillment is rapidly drawing near].

Taking into account  all the above, if putting the possibility of an attack on Israel in % terms, it's probably no more than 1-2% at present. The odds of Israel being attacked may increase to around 5% if and when Syria is attacked by the USA or by a combination of Western Powers – and that also depends on how extensive the attack against Syria. If the attack is limited to specific targets and the Assad regime would not be in danger of falling, there would be no attack on Israel. If it is an extensive attack on Syria (does not seem likely as of now), and Assad feels he has nothing to lose, then there is a 5%-10% chance he would attack Israel (and destroy himself and Syria in the process).

Nevertheless, because of even the 1% possibility we are preparing for the worst and praying it will not happen. Life goes on almost as normal - except that people are lining up for gas masks.

The Frank family doesn’t have gas masks and probably won't get them (there are enough gas masks for only 60% of the population and most of them are already gone), but we are laying in some provisions such as bottled water, dried foods and Lilah's special Almond milk in our "safe" room where we will sit if there is - God Forbid - any attack. Again I say, and so do most Israelis , that the possibility is there but very very small of Israel being attacked by Syria or Iran or anyone else. “Degree of danger” just a little above the "normal" situation here. 

Please keep praying that the results of the present crisis in Syria will not place Israel in any danger over and above what we have known for 4,000 years.  Also please pray for all the innocent civilians in Syria.

Thanks again for your concern, and we send our Love to all our friends in the USA and elsewhere.  And we wish our Jewish family and friends  a Happy, Healthy and Sweet New Year

David Frank, Lundi Frank, Shanee Kfir-Frank, Sarah Frank and all the little Franks.

 


 


Iran – the local Israeli view/s  (Libya, Egypt, Tunisia too):

Everyone agrees that the Shia Moslem regime in Iran is dangerously crazy. The same people are in charge there now as they were when they murdered thousands of their own 15 year-old children using them as human mine-sweepers – to clear the mines away by blowing themselves up “for Allah”. (On the other side were the crazy Sunni Moslem Iraqis who lost the 8 year Shia-Sunni war with Iran mainly because they didn’t have as many children “to martyr” as did the Iranians. The Iraqi Sunnis however killed 30,000 of their own people by dropping poison-gas bombs on them). This is the neighborhood we live in. It’s all Radical Islam – just some are more radical than others. So before demonizing Israel because we build a fence to keep out murderous Arab Islamist terrorists, our liberal chattering-class elitist friends in Europe and America should take a good look at all the Islamist countries around us – before and after the so-called Arab Spring.

Most sane and realistic Israelis believe that the Iranians, given the opportunity, would not hesitate to try and “wipe Israel off the map” with a nuclear attack if they have the bomb.  (i.e. most of the Jewish population with the exception of a small minority of radical ultra-leftists who, like President Obama, believe it’s possible to talk to radical Islamic crazies in a rational and logical manner).The Iranian mullahs don’t really care if 10 million of their 70 million population dies in a retaliatory strike by Israeli nuclear submarines or by America – or whoever. Like Hitler, they just want to kill all the Jews in the world, starting with those in Israel.

So most of us think it is essential to stop Iran from getting the A bomb or H bomb or any nuclear weapons of mass destruction. By whatever means will do the job.

There are different opinions as to how much time is left  before Iran passes the point of no return as far as Israel is concerned – i.e. passes that point where an attack by Israel on Iran’s nuclear facilities will not justify its cost in human life on both sides , Iran’s and Israel’s (also the lives of Iran’s proxies – Hizballah and Hamas).   Therefore it is felt that every opportunity should be given to the U.S. and its Western allies to go  for a regime change in Iran by virtue of very tough economic sanctions. These sanctions will supposedly bring Iran to its knees and either force Iran to abandon its nuclear program – or else face total economic collapse and possible revolution against the Radical Islamists in  power. Regime change. The Israelis do not believe this will happen. Like their friends in the Syrian regime, the Iranian government will be prepared to murder thousands and tens of thouands of its innocent civilians in order to stay in power and accomplish their immediate goal of becoming a nuclear power. And the American government, although paying lip-service to preventing Iran becoming a nuclear power, is not prepared to go to War for this.

This is where the Americans and Israelis differ. America can, and will if necessary, live with a nuclear Iran. Just as America lives with a nuclear Pakistan and a nuclear North Korea. Not comfortable, but also not an existential life-threatening situation. (Iran could kill millions in New York and perhaps even Washington D.C. with a couple of nuclear bombs, but in return Iran would be totally and completely wiped out forever. Even the crazies would not be allowed to go so far as to attack mainland America with nuclear weapons).

Israel, on the other hand, can be wiped out with one nuclear bomb;  more than 50% of Iran, including all the crazies who would be well prepared and fortified, would survive the counter-attack. We simply cannot afford to allow this as even a remote possibility. When Adolf Hitler, may his memory be cursed forever, said he was going to kill all the Jews in the world, nobody believed him. And when he started doing just that not one of the nations of the world, including the United States of America , found it within their souls to try and save the Jews from being murdered. Six million Jews were murdered by the Nazis. It took great organizational skills to accomplish this over 4 years. Now there are 6 million Jews in Israel – all in one small area, not spread out over Europe. All it would take to murder these 6 million would be one or two nuclear bombs and one day rather than 4 years.

We do not think the USA, whether under Democratic or Republican rule, would “come to the rescue” if Israel was attacked with nuclear weapons by Iran.(And in any case, even if America did intervene, it would be too late). Nor would Iran be destroyed after the act was completed. President Obama’s government has made sure that the Iranians also understand this. There will be a trade-off. In return for Iran not interfering with the normal passage of the world’s oil through the Straits of Hormuz, America will not attack Iran’s nuclear installations and will also NOT have Israel’s back if Israel decides to attack. This was made brutally clear by Admiral Dempsey, America’s Chief of Armed Forces  – obviously at the request of President Obama.( Dempsey said he would not be “complicit” in any Israeli attack on Iran – a very strong and strangely nuanced word to use on an ally).

America has different long-term strategic interests to those of Israel. Iran and the Moslem states in general, all of whom support the Jihadists (radical Moslems) in one way or another, are seen by your State Department as essential to the long-term strategic interests of America, whether it be for their oil or for their present and future economic power to “buy American”.  The Joker in the pack here is the very warm personal and political relationship of President Obama with the Saudis. The Saudis are Sunni Moslems. The Iranians are Shiite Moslems. The Saudis hate the Iranians even more than they hate the Israelis, if that is possible. President Obama may have to swallow hard and support Israel, not because he believes it is in America’s interest to do so (it is of course) but because the Saudis tell him to do so.

Moral considerations are non-existent, just as they were for Darfur and are at present non-existent as the Syrian regime murders its own people, and Al Quaida murders American Embassy personnel in Libya including the Ambassador. America needs stronger world leadership from President Obama – or from someone who replaces him. It cannot just be a bump in the road that Al Quaida organizes attacks on American Embassies throughout the Arab and Moslem world on 9/11 -  the anniversary of the Twin Towers – and America carries on talking blah blah as if nothing disastrous happened…..

So Israel will take care of itself. We cannot afford to allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon.

If the sanctions are not effective enough to stop Iran , if the Obama administration is not prepared even to postulate “red-lines” which if crossed would automatically trigger a military option then Israel is left with a choice between attacking Iran’s nuclear installations  - which may well lead to an all-out war – or facing a truly terrifying existential threat of being annihilated. Both choices are horrible, but being annihilated and slaughtered like sheep as by the Nazis and their European allies is far worse, is final. In possible War with Iran and its proxies Israel will not only survive but will win and recover quickly .

So there it is. At a certain stage, if Iran does not cease its rush to nuclear weapons of mass destruction, and at a time which we believe appropriate, Israel will attack Iran’s nuclear facilities as best we can. We hope that America and maybe some other Western nations will participate in this attack together with us – or maybe for their own tactical and strategic political reasons, they would prefer to destroy these facilities without Israel being involved. Even better. We do not look for Wars – we look for Peace , but first of all we look for Survival.

We believe that we still have time. If the economic sanctions against Iran will be applied seriously by the Western powers – as has not yet been the case – there is an outside chance that War will be averted.
In the humble opinion of the writer Israel has by far the most suitable leaders capable of making these decisions – in the persons of Bibi Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, both of whom are highly intelligent, rational, experienced leaders and warriors who have both been involved in Life or Death situations in the past. They are very far from being ‘political hacks’ and are the most qualified people available to lead Israel.

May God help us all.


David Frank

 


Older Noah's Ark updates are below latest update

Dr. Price's PowerPoint Slides related to Obama's "Solution"


















Hamas website in Arabic showing a nuclear solution




05/09/11

ISRAEL'S INDEPENDENCE DAY

The great State of Israel came into being 63 years ago. Ever since most of the nation's of the world have either denied its existence or sided with those who have worked toward its destruction. Those forces have only grown stronger and more prominent, and today threaten the continued existence of the Jewish state, if not the Jewish People, in an unprecedented way. Zionism is simply the desire of the Jewish People for their historic homeland, and those who share this desire for the Jewish People must also share the name of Zionist. Many Christian denominations treat the term "Zionist" as synonymous with "occupier," "racists," or "Islamaphobe." However, based on the "Christian ethic" of most of these denominations, that the Christian gospel is "justice and compassion," what could be more "Christian" than to side with an historically oppressed people (who in most cases were oppressed by wrong-minded "Christians") and whose only aspiration is to live in peace and security? How strange it is that much of Christianity does not acknowledge the rebirth of the State of Israel when it was the State of Israel that birthed Christianity in the first place!

We at World of the Bible Ministries proudly proclaim we are Christian Zionists and that we stand with the purpose and plan of God with respect to Israel's return to her Land and pray for the soon return of all of her people to the LORD (Jeremiah 31:31-34; Isaiah 27:9 with 59:20–21, in Romans 11:26-27). We wish our Israeli friends a most hearty hag sameach on their celebration of their independence day (Yom Ha'atzmaut) and pledge our support as Christians to their security in their homeland which we know will be used by God to bless all peoples of the world (Genesis 12:3).

Randall Price
Director, World of the Bible Ministries, Inc.

05/04/11

BIN LADEN AND HITLER BOTH DIE ON JEWISH HOLOCAUST DAY OF REMEMBERANCE

By David Frank* 

The Armed Forces  of the United States of America  have shown the world what it means to exact both justice and revenge, no matter what the cost in time or treasure. Killing Osama Bin Laden is small revenge for all the lives murdered by him, but huge justice. America has shown the world that nobody , will kill innocent Americans without being hunted down like the animal he is, and eventually pay the price.

 Osama Bin Laden and Adolf Hitler both died on May 1st. May 1st. 2011 is The Day of Remembrance for those 6 million Jews murdered by the Nazis in the Holocaust. On this day the air raid sirens go off in Israel, and the whole country stops whatever they are doing for 2 minutes in memory of the 6 million of our brothers murdered only because they were Jews. Hitler was the head of the Nazi snake. Osama Bin Laden was the head of the Islamist snake.  His aims were the same as Hitler’s aims.  In the same way as it is a lie that the Nazis were only a small minority of the German and European peoples, so it was/is a lie that the Radical Islamists are only a small minority of the great Islam people.

Without the overt and covert support -usually open and overt– of the Latvians, Lithuanians, Poles , Germans, Austrians and other educated and cultured European nations, the Nazis and their local ‘allies’ would never have been able to finish off 6 million Jews.

Today Radical Islam would not be able to exist without the open support of the majority of Moslems world-wide. The aims of Radical Islam are well-known.  World-dominance, starting with the physical destruction of Israel and the murder of the 6 million Jews living in Israel. After which Europe and then the USA. Either acceptance of the religion of Islam and Islamic Law (Sharia) or physical destruction. They do not hide their aims and ideology. The Hamas in Gaza, Hizbulla in Lebanon and their masters in Iran do not recognize the right of Israel to exist – in exactly the same way as Hitler did not recognize the right of the Jews to exist. Hitler managed to murder 6 million of us before he was stopped on the 1st. May 1945.  

Bin Laden was the head of this particular snake called Islam, but (Radical) Islam is a monster with many heads. All these heads need to be cut off; Nasralla of the Hizbulla, Mashaal of Hamas(+ 4 or 5 others), Ahminajad and Khomeini of Iran (+ about  20 others), the leaders of the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt and Jordan. Basically the heads of all the Wahhabis and the Salafis and all the other potential murderers need to be stopped NOW, and not wait and see if they will be as successful as their mentor, Adolf Hitler, and his top student Osama Bin Laden. And when they get to Hell, as they all will indubitably do, they will find waiting there for them not 72 virgins, but 144 Biblical Plagues which they will suffer for all eternity – without any release.

It is no coincidence that they went to meet their Satan on the same date that the 6 million Jews in Israel have a special Day of Remembrance for the 6 million Jews murdered in Europe.

The Jews of Israel will NEVER go down a similar road to their European brethren. Anybody who comes to destroy Israel will be destroyed himself, and all his supporters with him. America has shown the way.

*David Frank is the director of the tour agency (Transglobal) used by World of the Bible Tours


NOTE: There are multiple reponses to NAMI on this page separated by date with the most current first.


12/13/10

DR. PATTON RESPONDS TO FURTHER NON-SUBSTANITIVE AD HOMINEM ATTACKS BY NAMI

NAMI tried to deal with the evidence and miserably failed. Now, they have resorted to ad hominem arguments (personal attacks) rather than deal with obvious demonstrations of fraud. In an attempt to sustain the slanderous accusation that I am a liar, they typed “don patton’s lies” into Google and merely copied and pasted the first 15 results from Google for their proof. We can tell they did this by the code in their own document. (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:kMroa8JFhCsJ:digbysblog.blogs pot.com/2009/04/liar-for-christ-by-tristero-blood.html+Don+Patton%27s+lies%E2%80% 8F&cd=3&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=cal) Notice the +Don+Patton%27s+lies, which translates to don patton’s lies. The apostrophe is the “%27” code.


The utter stupidity of this feeble effort is demonstrated by the fact that ½ the output results have nothing to do with Don Patton, except my name was on the same page as the word “lie.” Several instances are blog pages where the name Patton comes up in one blog and someone uses the word “lies” three blogs later on a different topic. Twice the word for “lies” means “laying, lays” as in the sentence, “The foundation of a house “lies” below the house. The Chinese English skills are clearly very bad, but it appears that they didn’t even read the Google results in context. They just typed in “don patton’s lies,” and copied the first 15 search results, then without reading, posted the results on their website as proof that someone on the internet called me a liar. This is supposed to prove that I am a liar. This action says all we need to know about NAMI. They are, pitifully inept, sadly naïve and far from scientific.

Examples:

One of the links NAMI posted as an example of “don patton’s lies” is a blog discussion that mentions my name (Patton) in connection with a reference on our web site to the conversion of world famous atheist Anthony Flew to Theism. The blogger is actually a creationists and is in the midst of a discussion affirming that DNA Code is evidence of Intelligent Design and says:

“On the one side of this Grand Canyon lies everything that can be explained by the chance and necessity of physicodynamics. On the other side lies those phenomena than can only be explained by formal choice contingency and decision theory—the ability to choose with intent what aspects of ontological being will be preferred, pursued, selected, rearranged, integrated, organized, preserved, and used.” We have the word “Patton” and the word “lies” on the same page but it does not say anything about Patton lying.

Another example of their “brilliant research” sites a link with my name (Patton) on the same page as a quotation of Charles Darwin from Origin of The Species

“It will be much more convenient to discuss this question in the chapter on the Imperfection of the geological record; and I will here only state that I believe the answer mainly lies in the record being incomparably less perfect than is generally supposed.”

Do we need to point out that Charles Darwin did not know Don Patton?

Another referenced link does use the word in correct sense, on a page where my name (“Patton”) is mentioned and maligned. The abuse is from the “North Texas Skeptics Association,” a group composed mostly of atheists. I aggravated them regularly while I was in Dallas. However, the referenced quotation is from a letter between two men whose discussion doesn’t even involve Don Patton. “…is poor, deficient, and full of lies.” Another relates to the “North Texas Skeptics” but is actually a quotation from me (“Patton”) regarding the then president of the “North Texas Skeptics.” “John Blanton had carelessly plagiarized the lies of Glen Kuban”

Still another NAMI referenced link sites the rants of a rabid evolutionist, responding to the prime time presentation by NBC of the video, “Mysterious Origins of Man.” The very professional production, narrated by Charlton Heston, interviewed me (“Patton”) describing the Paluxy River footprints, human tracks and dinosaur tracks side by side. Famous evolutionist, Richard Dawkins of Oxford, is enraged by such evidence and has stated that such evidence “would blow the theory of evolution out of the water.” One reviewer wrote a letter to the editor of Science magazine lamenting the fact that this program “set science back twenty years.” The NAMI cited evolutionist was understandably railing against the program when he said:

“This entire production was an absolute travesty; it attacked reason and knowledge with outrageous lies and distortions. The show's producers aim was to disseminate falsehood without the responsibility of having to defend it; …”

Another cited link quotes evolutionist Ronald Powell’s sarcastic remark regarding my (“Patton”) reference to Professor E. J. H. Corner of the Cambridge University, who said, “But I still think that to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation.” Powell chafes at the implication and says,

"With all of this in mind concerning the lies and frauds that have been committed what would an honest botanical evolutionist say?”

He is sarcastically referring to the lies and frauds of evolutionists. (I think it’s true without the sarcasm.)

Another cited link references my (“Patton”) use of a statement made by English astronomer and mathematician, Fred Hoyle, who demonstrated challenges to Darwinism from the science of mathematics.

“Fred Hoyle is often quoted as comparing the probability of the origin of life to the probability of a tornado building a plane in a junkyard. Hoyle's opinion was based on several mistakes and misconceptions about both evolution and abiogenesis. These errors are detailed in the Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics, and Probability of Abiogenesis Calculations”

The blogger does not like Sir Fred Hoyle or me, but in this instance, he is saying that Hoyle is the liar.

I have spent a lifetime exposing calloused enemies of the truth, who typically resort to ad hominem attacks and often accuse me of lying (just as NAMI). Those who deny the truth are unable to make a substantive response. What else can they do. Of course there are valid examples of this on the internet. Jesus refers to such circumstances as occasions of joy.

“Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. 12 “Rejoice and be glad, for your reward in heaven is great; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.” (Matthew 5:11)   

Notorious evolutionist and long time antagonist, Glen Kuban is the source of most of the rest of the NAMI citations. He has spent a major portion of his life slandering creationists, calling them liars. I consider it an honor to be on his list of slandered creationists with scientists such as Henry Morris, John Morris, Stephen Austin, etc.

Several NAMI citations are related to one of the very human-like tracks in the Paluxy River. Kuban was present when I spoke at a national creation conference in Tennessee, presenting compelling evidence that human and dinosaur tracks were present in the river bed. The next day two witnesses saw Kuban in Texas, in the Paluxy River with a long "iron bar." The two witnesses knew Kuban well and called us immediately, fearing Kuban was damaging the tracks. Two days later we documented that the very track I had featured at the conference in Tennessee, had indeed been vandalized.

When the testimony of the witnesses and the vandalization was reported, Kuban went ballistic and called everyone associated with the report a liar and has not slowed down since. Several years later I challenged him to take a polygraph exam regarding the destruction of the track. I offered to pay for the exam if he passed. He said he would, but did not. More years passed and his accusations of lying persisted. So, I found the most reputable polygraph examiner I could find in Dallas. His qualifications are detailed on his web site:   http://www.joemorrispolygraph.com/about.htm   Mr. Morris examined my account of the story in great detail and I passed the exam with flying colors. I then challenged Kuban to do the same, offering to pay him double the cost if he passed (provided he use a qualified examiner). This challenge and offer has been detailed on our web since the middle of 2007.

http://www.bible.ca/tracks/taylor-trail-glen-kuban-slanderous-accusations-refuted.htm

Kuban has quit speaking to me but he attacks behind my back as often as possible. His slanderous accusations are all over the internet, but he still has not taken me up on my offer to pay him double his cost if he passes a qualified polygraph exam. On the one hand, we have a plurality of witnesses and a qualified polygraph exam. On the other hand, we have ubiquitous accusations from a notorious slanderer of creationists. Some may not be able to see a difference. Christians can.

Evidently, these kinds of things are the best ad hominem attack NAMI can muster. If this is the worst that can be said, it is a ringing recommendation. Christians see this as time to “Rejoice and be glad!”


12/12/10

DR. DAVID LIANG'S OUTLINE OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE NAMI "FIND"

Dear Dr. Price,

 

I am David Liang from Canada. Attached please find my profile. Very hesitantly, I started getting involved in asking NAMI to clarify on their latest discovery.

As far back as 2005, I started voicing my deep concern about their movie on their so-called discovery of the Ark.  Then in 2008,  after they showed me the petrified wood together with their assurance that there was a huge wall of such a petrified wood as well as a laboratory test result from Hong Kong U, I reversed my objection and thought they might have found the Ark. 

This April, after they described their latest discovery in a third location, I started looking into the information that they released. Since then, I have written to the NAMI executives and their Board members asking for clarifications. Failing to get the requested response, I started going public with my concern. This then led to a series of Public Notes, Public Lectures in Toronto and Hong Kong.  The last public lecture in Hong Kong was sponsored by the largest Chinese Church in HKG, the senior pastor of the Church of 10,000 was there to back me up. The lecture was attended by over 600. Prior to that, I gave a special lecture addressed to about 40 pastoral staff.

Today, the President of one Seminary in Hong Kong has openly declared their objection to the way that NAMI made their pronouncement. He, in fact stated that the way NAMI used the Ark to raise fund as being immoral.

Dr. David Liang’s outline of concerns:

I am Dr. David Liang from Ottawa, Canada. I was the Head and Thrust Leader of Space Systems and Technologies within the Canadian Department of National Defence. I was a civilian scientist with equivalent military rank of one star General. I was in charge of all research and development activities within Canadian Department of National Defence for Surveillance of Space, Surveillance from Space, Ballistic Missile Defence as well as Nuclear radiation activities. One interesting experience in my career was to lead the Canadian Defence delegation to Israel in August 1997, to participate in a technical discussion sponsored by US Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO), dealing with issues related to anti-ballistic  missile technology. I took early retirement in 2003 so that I can concentrate more time in Christian ministries. I have just returned from speaking in Macau Polytech Institute, Hong Kong City University, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Mission Convention of the largest Evangelical Chinese Church in Hong Kong as well as speaking to seminary students of a SE Asian Seminary. I have written 4 books in Chinese on personal evangelism, apologetics and Bible prophecy and world events, etc. that have gone into multiple printings. One has gone into 8th printing.

Sorry that after much prayer in front of the Lord, I have decided to write this humble note. It is with an extremely heavy heart that I have to pen this note.

As an evangelical scientist, I fully believe in the historicity of the global flood as described in the Book of Genesis, and have been more than enthusiastic in hoping that our dear fellow Christians in MEDIA have indeed found the Noah’s Ark. In fact, I was overjoyed this April when I saw their proclamation of the historic discovery, but over the last few months, I have agonized a lot and have decided that I need to make known the following concerns of mine.

Before I start going through my journey of blind trust in their discovery to a real skeptic suspicious of dishonesty being directly or indirectly being played out, I need to apprise you that Rev Fai Luk, the President of Bakke Graduate University, Hong Kong Campus (BGUHK) has issued on Sept 14, 2010 a Position Statement on the “Discovery of Noahʼs Ark” which stated that:

“Due to the fact that a number of BGUHKʼs alumni, consultants and supporters got involved in the heated discussion on the claim that Noahʼs Ark was discovered by Noahʼs Ark Ministries International Limited in the recent months, BGUHK considers necessary to declare our position as follows:

1. Bakke Graduate University (HK) (BGUHK) believes that the claim of the discovery of Noahʼs Ark (the Ark) is archeologically and scientifically pre-mature;

2. BGUHK has no objection against the use of the Ark as the theme of any evangelistic event; but if such event is in any way related to the “discovery” claim of the Ark, BGUHK has reservation to this kind of evangelism with unsubstantiated materials;

3. BGUHK deems it unethical if any fund raising event is related to the claim of the “discovery” of the Ark.

Please note that Rev. Fai Luk is also the President of a well respected Evangelical seminary school called Hong Kong Bethel Bible Seminary.

One should be aware that the proclamation of the Ark discovery by NAMI started in 2005 with their release of a record breaking box office reception of their first movie entitled “The Revelation that Astonishes the World.” They based their claim of their 2004 discovery on these facts:

-       The satellite discovery of the Ark;

-       The house hold secret passed on from three generations of a Turkish family that pointed to the Ark;

-       The claim that the location of the Ark was guarded by ghost;

-       The supernatural disturbance affecting the performance of their camera; and

-       God answered their prayers for the weather.

Then in 2007, they held an International Press Conference announcing another Earth shattering discovery. This time they showed a wooden fossil sample that they claimed to have brought down from a second location on Mount Ararat. They gave me their assurance that they cut this down from a petrified wall with length of 11.5 meters,and height of 2.6meters. They were also kindly enough to show me the scientific study prepared by one Hong Kong University laboratory verifying it as a wooden material.

So the Announcement of discovery made in April of this year is in fact the third time, and this site is totally different from the previous two.

In 2005, I was fully skeptical of their claim but was much impressed with the story that they told me about their discovery in 2007. What turned my scientific mind from a full hearted support of their claim into a skeptic started with these realizations after their April 2010 proclamation of discovery with the certainty of 99.9%:

-       The location of their 2010 discovery is distinct from the first two. Then how can it be possible for Noah to have more than one Ark. If the Ark had broken into three pieces, assuming all their three discoveries were right on, then the Newton’s Law would tell me that the broken pieces of the Ark would fall tumbling down rather than floating high up to the altitude of 4000m;

-       Then as I more carefully examined the video footage of their discovery, I noticed that there are quite a few things that made me suspicious of their claim that they are 99.9% confident of their discovery.

So I humbly sent a confidential note to their CEO and Board members requesting that they clarify a few of these issues:

-       Since they have claimed that the wooden samples have been dated to 4800 years ago, I sincerely requested that they release the radiocarbon test result;

-       Ask them to explain why was it that there are very straight and fresh looking straws in the space that they entered. This would seem to contradict the Second Law of Thermodynamics in terms of aging process, if the contents of the structures were truly left over from Noah's time!

-       Ask them to explain why was it that the walls and floors of the 6 space that they entered are so smooth and “polished” looking. I have seen 400 year old wooden walls in Indonesia that are much rougher and coarser looking than these walls that are claimed to be from Noah’s era; and

-       Why is it that the 7th room that they did not enter are so much rougher looking, and so much more ancient looking than the 6 rooms that they entered.

Then I noticed that in April of this year they stated that : “The first site is a place believed by the local people from generation to generation, we threw stones into it and saw object that seems to be wood but we can’t enter into the site, therefore some still have doubt,”  So I asked them to clarify:

-       whether they now have serious doubt about the revelation that astonishes the full world which sets a Hong Kong ticket sales record in 2005 with their movie entitled “Revelation that Astonishes the World”?

-       If so, in their October 2007 press conference, which they claimed to have discovered the wooden fossil on Mount Ararat, do they also have any doubt about such a proclamation?

Then as they refused to respond to my sincere request for clarifications, then I started to dig harder into their proclaimed discovery of having 99.9% certainty.

I started to see these systemic patterns of handling their information release, please note some of the following information came directly from Neville Chamberlain of Hong Kong and Carl Wieland, the Managing Director of Creation Ministries International (Australia):

Possible manipulation of facts:

    1. As I noted above that they have proclaimed that the samples were tested to 4800 years ago, but one of their Board members assured me that the reason that they could not release the test data is related to political reason dealing with Turkish Authority which forbids them to make public the test result. But now I have a real trust worthy witness that has told me that during a Skype (online) meeting in April 2010 with TEML, they informed Dr Andrew Snelling and Dr Terry Mortenson (of AIG) that they have tested 3 samples. “However, only one of the three samples that was radiocarbon dated gave an age of approximately 4,800 years. The other two samples gave ages of around 120–132 years!” This was published on May 1, 2010 by AIG in their web site with the title of “Has Noah’s Ark been found atop Mount Ararat? ”  So why is it that they only release the date of 4800 years and not the more recent dating of 120-132 years? Did they intentionally hold back part of the facts so as to have more convincing support for their claim ? http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/05/01/news-to-note-05012010.

    1. This C-14 dating directly contradicts their claim that the wood is from the actual "Noah's Ark". Their only explanation is that their samples must have been "contaminated" or collected incorrectly, or that it MUST be incorrect dating results, because their subjective experiences on the mountain convince them that the wood structures they filmed are part of Noah's Ark !

    1. Furthermore, the results of dating and analysis of the white pellets scattered across the floor of one of the spaces have NEVER been disclosed publicly, presumably because they do not support the conclusion NAMI wants people to accept. All such samples are tightly controlled by NAMI; nothing has been made available for independent, objective analysis.

    1. They have claimed that they took the photo of the 7th un-entered space. Since the walls of the 7th un-entered space is drastically different from the 6 rooms that they entered. I repeatedly asked one of their Board members who has maintained some sort of dialogue with me, he repeatedly assured me that the Hong Kong team members took the pictures and not the Turkish guide. Now I have the witness that can vow that “the HK members of NAMI never saw this site or filmed it... their Turkish guide gave them the photo, telling them it was from the same area as the other structures. The smaller similar looking space which they DID enter is presented in the latest version of their film immediately following the shot of the large space, leading viewers to the (false) conclusion that these two spaces are similar. In fact they most definitely are NOT the same! It "appears to be accurate and factual", but is NOT!” So if the 7th space that they did not enter were just some thing that the Turkish guide claimed to be there, the NAMI claim should be taken with a full load of salt. In fact, if the 7th un-entered space is removed, there is very little that they can claim to be from the time of Noah. The walls and the floors are too new and the straws are too fresh and straight to have survived from the time of Noah.
    2. This latter remark was in fact made by Rev Patrick So, the Senior Pastor of the largest Evangelical Chinese Church in Hong Kong, as he was delivering the closing remark after I made the special talk on “The Bible, UFO and the Ark, ” sponsored by his Church. In fact 5 days before I gave this talk, the CEO of NAMI gave a special presentation to Rev So trying to convince him of the NAMI discovery. After having seen the video footage, Rev So became fully convinced that the walls and floors of the so-called Ark discovery are way too smooth and “polished” to be from the time of Noah. Please note that Rev Patrick So has kindly authorized me to present his quotes in this humble note.

    1. Apparently, the suggestion of including the 7th space in their presentation was because Parasut, their Turkish guide assured ONE of the team members that it was a photo of a space between 2 of the other spaces; they were told it couldn't be entered a second time because rock slides and ice had covered the entrance (or something to that effect). However, there is a side story that should be noted. "7 is the perfect number" was the "spiritual reason" for including it in their presentation. Is this one more of the things that showed how their presentations can be manipulated or massaged for whatever reasons that they might have envisaged?

  1. Possible traces of creative editing:

    1. To add weight to their personal convictions that this is "history in the making", they have been filming a plethora of experts' early comments of affirmation that this could well be the real Ark. Such sound bites have already been included in various short videos, such as the one found here http://www.media.org.hk/noahsarksearch/video.php?id=101. This short video boldly proclaims (in Cantonese) that authorities from around the world affirm that the Ark in the Bible has finally been found. However, the very first "expert" who speaks (in English), John McIntosh (another Ark explorer), had this to say in an email dated Sept 24, "On this video clip they have me saying "most likely is Noah's Ark." In context, I was saying if the wooden chambers could be verified as actually being there, etc--then what has been found "most likely is Noah's Ark." Please note that John spoke as a sympathetic supporter at NAMI's Dutch Press Conference. He now says, "So far, the wooden chambers have not been verified and evidence seems to be mounting that very possibly they are not there!"

    1. They have quoted Rev. (Dr.) Hing Kau Yeung, the Professor of Chinese School of Theology in Hong Kong as saying that he fully vowed for the historicity of their discovery. But in a breakfast get together on Sept. 20, 2010 at the City View Hotel in Hong Kong, Rev Yeung repeatedly told me that the emphasis of his comments was that it is too early to say that this is Noah’s Ark. Since then, he has asked NAMI to remove his comments from their web site. This in fact has now been removed from their web site presentation.  Please note that Rev. (Dr.) Hing Kau Yeung, as the NAMI international advisor, has authorized me to make this quote.

    1. In their April 2010 News Conference, they have publicly proclaimed that they are 99.9% certain of their discovery of the Ark. But now in their web site, all such references have been removed. Instead, they are now using the figure of 90% certainty.

  1. Being naive / Intentional exaggeration

    1. In 2003, they claimed that in their Ark exploration trip to Turkey they have found Noah’s Anchor. They further claimed that this is a gigantic archaeological discovery by the Chinese outside China. Their senior exploration team leader has also extensively quoted the fraudulent claims of Ron Wyatt in the discovery of the Ark as well as using the pictures posted in his web site, so they must have read about Ron Wyatt’s claim about the discovery of Noah’s anchor in 1977. Then why is it they still try to take claim in 2003 that this is the gigantic archaeological discovery by the Chinese outside China?

    1. In May 2008, as I was invited to visit their Head Office in Hong Kong, they excitedly told me that some one in the US had offered to help them hire the CIA Top Secret satellite for use in hunting the ark. They were hoping that I would congratulate them for having such an incredible access. They were extremely disappointed that I was very frank in telling them, if some one in the USA were to offer help from using FBI agents to guard their office, would they be thrilled or doubt that FBI would ever allow their agents to be hired for the pure purpose of private security. Likewise, I asked them if the so-called Top Secret satellite were available for their hiring, would such a satellite be a TOP Secret satellite?

 

  1. Possible Issues that need to be further investigated:

    1. If one were to carefully review the photo of the un-entered 7th space, the walls have the “appearance” of wood, they are more likely to be basalt rock (lava) laid down in layers and cooled rapidly (a combination of Flood Basalt and Columnar Basalt). The detail of this view please refer to the attached power point presentation.

    1. If the discovery site that they proclaimed in their 2005 movie were truly the remnants of Noah”s Ark, why is it that it had survived the time from Noah’s era to 2004, but has now suddenly collapsed within the last few years. One should note that there are no major earthquakes over the last few years over the Ararat Mount. Isn’t this worthy of asking whether this site was truly the remnants of Noah’s Ark or just an artificial hut casually built without strong physical support for a specific purpose? Therefore, it quickly collapsed after the earth shattering Chinese movie was shot as well as a way of destroying the so-called evidence, so that no further investigation can be made of their world astonishing claim.

    1. There are suggestions from a well respected and honorable explorer that claimed to know the people working around Parasut, the NAMI Turkish guide, he has these to say:

-       When I arrived in eastern Turkey on the 6th of this month of May, I was shown many samples of wood used in the construction of an old house and fence that look a lot like what I could see in the video. It is suggested that the wood in the video came from a very old building such as a castle, and also from an old wooded ship. It is suggested by my Kurdish friends that the wood was planted in to the caves.

-       We took along an English speaking Kurdish man who claimed to have worked with Parasut on the project in the past ... about 2 or more years in the past.

-       The 3 caves are located on the south and SSW side of the mountain between 3800 and 4200 meters. This is where the building and the potentially photographic fraud was put together.

-       These types of damaging claims must be carefully reviewed and discounted, before one can insist that the NAMI discovery is 99.9% certain.

  1. Possible untruthful official response:

    1. In their official web site, they posted their response to an article of mine entitled “Basic academic principle and rationalistic apologetics.” They stated that “they never thought of getting into the hall of the academic world,Dr. Liang has used the academic standard to measure them,they are shocked by such a prestigious treatment of them." Then they explained that : “We are only making it known to the world. … using the “deductive reasoning” to provide temporarily up to this moment, the best explanation to the structure of the wood – Noah’s Ark. ” and “… we are waiting for scholars from all directions to dwell deep into the research to find the answer.”

-      If they are in deed waiting for scholars from all directions to find out the answers, then why are they making the claim that “We are not 100% sure that this is the remnant site of the Ark but our certainty is 99.9%。”

-      As well, in their “The Ark is Not a Myth” vision sharing prayer letter for their well publicized meeting in Melbourne, Australia, they have stated “Thanks be to God,this time the search team has discovered the remnants of Noah’s Ark on Mount Ararat in Turkey。Once again, we manifested the love and righteousness of God to the world,providing a powerful rebuttal to  those that doubted the thoughts and teachings of the Bible, taking an advanced step to prove the reliability of the Bible.” Does this pronouncement show that they are still waiting for the scholars to find out the answer?

    1. In my article, I quoted from the damaging article of a non-believer, Robert Cargill “On the Misuse of Archaeology for Evangelistic Purposes.” The aim is to bring home the danger of misusing archaeology for the purpose of evangelism. I carefully stated that special attention should be paid to the article “On the Misuse of Archaeology for Evangelistic Purposes,” which clearly pointed out some key questions that deserved our quiet reflection and review in front of our Lord.  I clearly stated that this article pointed out that “An overtly evangelical organization seeking to kick off an advertising campaign with the hopes of converting people to Christianity, fundraising, and selling DVDs, tickets to a theme park, and tickets to a “museum” exhibition, while deliberately circumventing the scholarly circles they knew would expose their balderdash barge before it ever set sail … For the ethically challenged NAMI “explorers,” the ends apparently justify the deceptive means. This is perhaps the most egregious, premeditated, blatant, and irresponsible misuse of archaeology in recent decades. ” I clearly stated that this article at the end pointed out that  “NAMI appears perfectly comfortable with fooling people into believing in Christianity using what they concede may be a hoax.”

-       I was really disappointed that a Christian organization such as MEDIA, can go so low as to openly twisted what I said in this article and then attacked me as saying that I was the one that made the blasphemous accusation that “the discovery of NAMI is a hoax” and “the motivation behind the hoax is about profit.” Such a twisting of what was said in the article cannot even fool a high school student, yet they have boldly published these in their official web site as a rebuttal to my article.

-       In my article, I started by describing how the authoritative UK scientific journal the “Nature,” on 12 January 2010 publicly exposed scandals of fraudulent technical writing in China, which resulted in the suspension of 70 articles in one Journal. Then I described how on March 23, 1989,Professors Martin Fleischman and Stanley Pons of the University of Utah shocked the scientific world by announcing their discovery of the holy grail of Cold Fusion. At that moment, I right away tasked two of my brightest nuclear scientists to verify their claimed success in releasing energy out of a jar of water at room temperature. My team of nuclear scientists soon disproved such possibility and almost simultaneously the University of Utah announced their suspension of these two Professors and closed off their multi-million dollar laboratory.

-       Then I dealt with a recent incident in China that pronounced the discovery of the tomb of a famous ancient King of China, which resulted in strong challenges by many of China’s top experts in archaeology. Some of these top experts cautioned that there is an inseparable wall between calling the discovery a possibility as compared to pronouncing it an assured discovery. 

-       Then I described how Mr. Ron Wyatt, within so-called Christian circle, had over the years pronounced many earth shattering archaeological discoveries, which were later proven to be fraudulent.  After citing his claims on the discovery of the Ark, I introduced the damaging article written by Dr. Cargill to warn about the danger of misusing archaeology for the purpose of evangelism. 

-       Yet a truth loving organization after reading my article, decided to publish a stern response in the front page of their web site, jumping from what I used as an example of frauds to making the claim that I have directly accused them of frauds:

-       In science, scholars in evolution and archaeology organization falsify, therefore the discovery of NAMI is false:

-       In the 80’s, since the claim of Ark discovery by the amateur archaeologist, Ron Wyatt is false therefore the NAMI discovery is false:

-       Since, in 1987, the Governor of the Agri District,  Sevket Ekinci supported Ron Wyatt’s claimed discovery of the Ark is false, therefore the NAMI discovery, which is supported by Turkish Government is false;

-       The frauds in the scientific community are aimed at large funding and social benefits, therefore the NAMI false claim of discovery is for mission, selling DVDs and tickets to the theme park;

-       The most important issues that I raised in my article is to beg them for their release of evidences to show how they can conclude with the certainty of 99.9%, instead their response came out as a personal frontal attack without forwarding any evidence to support their claim of 99.9% certainty in Ark discovery.

-       Rev Neville Chamberlain of New Zealand, who has been a missionary to Hong Kong for over two decades, can vow for me that in my article I was being very careful in not having one word of accusation towards NAMI for fraud. In fact this note addressed to you was helped by him to get finalized.

In view of all the above, with a real heavy heart, I am submitting this note to you so that you can fully appreciate the way NAMI has conducted themselves in the name of spreading the good news of our Lord. In order that this is fully opened to them, I am also copying this note to them.

May God have mercy on all of us, as this type of revelation might cause hundreds or even thousands that have accepted Christ over the past few years to fall, since many of these were said to have been led to Christ, in their massive evangelistic outreach efforts around the world!

11/28/10

DRS. PRICE AND PATTON RESPOND TO NAMI’S FIRST PUBLISHED OFFICIAL RESPONSE TO OUR CRITIQUE.

NAMI has stated that we have simply passed on rumors and hearsay and have presented unverified evidence and made untrue statements concerning their claims. We have presented the evidence we have collected through personal experience with Parasut and NAMI, interviews with pertinent sources (which we verified as to their credibility), and rigorous personal investigation on Mt. Ararat. This data represents our opinion, but it is no less opinion than that presented by NAMI. It should be understood both as a critique of their publicly-presented material and as an alternative viewpoint necessary to the public making an informed decision about NAMI’s extraordinary claim.

Our intention has not been to defame NAMI as a Christian ministry, and many of the points we have made in our critique relating to questions of photographs and evidence presented to NAMI and our U.S. team by Parasut were first discussed with NAMI leadership in private (we believe at that time the responsibiblity for any deception rested with Parsut). It is for this reason we published in our critique numerous letters exchanged between ourselves and NAMI representative Clara Wei, as well as one addressed to the NAMI leadership. Both authors of the critique are professionals who seek to operate in a scientific manner and hold NAMI to these same standards. We believe that our questions and scrutiny of Parasut and his evidence resulted in his banning us  from the intended expedition in 2008 and refusing to include us (and any professional geologist or archaeologist) in the NAMI team in 2009 when they were shown the “discovery.”

NAMI has rejected the professional report supported by numerous geologists around the world that the samples they claimed as “wood” from Mt. Ararat in their publication and Press Conference of 2008 are in fact volcanic tuff. This was made on the basis of standard tests (specific gravity test, heft test, Munson color chart comparison, microscopic examination) with the large sample in Dogubabyazit and from close photographs thereafter. The photographs alone are sufficient for a trained geologist to make a determination that this is rock and not wood. They assert that our intentions were nationalistic and prejudiced against Chinese expertise. This, of course, is ridiculous, as one of our own expedition team is Chinese and our team leader’s wife is Chinese. We also have included in our critique the report of Dr. David Liang a Chinese scientist who has serious doubts about the NAMI discovery based on their published data.

NAMI also claims that the “doctored photograph” of the smaller sample that appeared in their publication was simply the result of “light setting” and “photographic techniques.” It is not possible to produce in a photo such complete saturation in a brown color  from an almost pure white original object. There is no question that the photo was presented in this manner so as to look like wood rather than rock in their publication, and therefore is an intentional deception.

NAMI also did not comment on the obviously fraudulent photos of Parasut in a cave labeled “Mt. Ararat” which is not on Mt. Ararat. but 50 kilometers away at the hotsprings at Kaplıca (Diyadin). This needs to be addressed by NAMI since these photos and the one of the brown wood (mentioned above) constitute fradualent information and undermine the credibility of their source – Parasut – who is the discoverer of the wooden structure on Mt. Ararat.

NAMI has asserted that we had no right to release photos of the pottery or of the wood structure given to us when we were part of the Chinese-U.S. team in 2008 and claim we have violated an agreement of trust not to do so. From 2008 until April 2010 we did not release these photos because we were considered an invested part of their team. However, in April 2010 Clara Wei wrote that we were no longer a part and refunded a portion of our investment. Nevertheless, at the time we received these photos we had paid for them as invested partners and were only bound by our oral agreement so long as we were partners. Only after I was informed Clara Wei of the end of the partnership did I reply to Clara and inform her (and the NAMI leadership) of our intentions to critique their material. The use of the photos was necessary to do this and well within our right. The pottery is essential to professionals verifying NAMI’s claim to the antiquity of their site, even though they have never offered this evidence to the public and it does not appear in the photos they released as a result of their own expedition to the sites.

In addition, NAMI has criticized our using classified sources. However, in journalism this is justified if compromising a source would jeopardize their safety. Our sources have stated in the strongest possible terms that they fear for their lives if their identities are revealed. When it is possible we will reveal our sources, however, we assure our audience that our sources have been vetted as to their credibility and have demonstrated the accuracy of their knowledge of the events and sites related to the NAMI claim.

What NAMI has not done is specifically answered all our statements or shown what they claim to be unverified and untrue in our critique. They only state "correcting their countless errors will be a tiresome exercise." We challenge them to offer us "correction" by answering our charges point-by-point in detail. Unless they are willing to do so and can provide satisfactorily answers to the charges we have made our charges should stand.

However, NAMI has incorrectly stated that our report stated that Dr. Price went to their sites. We did not say that Dr. Price went to the NAMI sites, but sent videographer Pedro Venegas to two of their sites. However, Dr. Patton (whom the NAMI response did not mention in this regard) did go to two of the NAMI sites.

NAMI has declared that the sites we picture (to which Dr. Patton went) are not their sites. We expected them to offer this argument as it would be their only possible defense. It is true that NAMI has other sites, which we did not visit. However, our several sources who led us to the two sites we pictured have sworn these are NAMI's sites. NAMI says that we did not show the wood that is pictured in their photos so these cannot be their sites. We have explained that this was because their sites have been ruined by the action of the moving glacier and that re-entrance to the two sites Mr. Venegas and Dr. Patton visited was therefore impossible. The wood was in situ (at the site) and not planted by members of our team. We have several witnesses who accompanied Dr. Patton to the sites and can testify to this fact. However, the important point to be made in not being able to enter and photograph the wood inside is that the sites could only have been recently made and could not have been in place for the past 5,000 years. Since the sites were constructed inside the crevasses of the glacier, the movement of the glacier in only one or two seasons has practically destroyed the structures.

We offer for evidence that at least one of the sites we describe is the same as the NAMI site from the photos of Dr. Patton at the entrance that matches the NAMI photos and film clip of the NAMI team's descent into the first narrow "space." While Dr. Patton could not make the same descent, he could see the remains of the wood deep inside this "space." We offer the photos below as as additional comparison between the site we investigated and that shown in NAMI’s released photos (see below). Our photographs at the first site appear to match NAMI's own photographs of a crevasse with a wooden structure published at their website.



Comparison of NAMI expedition photo with Patton photo showing similarity of glacier color and wood plank

Photo from NAMI website for comparison

We expect that NAMI will continue to claim that we did not find their sites. All that NAMI needs to do to refute us is to immediately release the GPS coordinates of all of their sites and all of the evidence they have in hand so a proper evaluation can be made independently by competent professionals in archaeology and other pertinent sciences. If after such an inquiry has been made we are proven to be in error concerning our conclusions we will gladly concede and publish a proper apology. However, until this time we have acted in good Christian character and conscience to present to the public facts that are necessary to get to the truth of NAMI’s claim.

(NAMI response from their website to Drs. Price and Patton original 11/22/10 critique translated to English follows this section)

Randall Price, Ph.D, Senior Archaeologist
Don Patton, Ph.D,
Senior Geologist

Ark Search LLC Expedition
Founder & President
World of the Bible Ministries, Inc.

嚴正聲明

Solemn Statement

「挪亞方舟國際事工」就Randall Price Don Patton的評論作出以下聲明:

Statement of Noah’s Ark Ministry International (NAMI) on the Comments by Randall Price and Don Patton

自「挪亞方舟國際事工」於本年四月發佈在亞拉臘山發現古木結構後,引來了全球廣泛討論。對於按實質理據、以客觀求真精神所提出的評論,不拘褒貶,我們一直以樂意的態度恭聆教益。但對於一些基督徒學者使用不盡不實、似是而非的資料,堆砌成一份貌似學術報告的文章,大字標題指控「挪亞方舟國際事工」欺詐舞弊,嚴重誣衊和傷害本機構和探索隊員,令我們深感憤怒和失望。

Since NAMI publicized in April this year of the discovery of an ancient wooden structure on Mt. Ararat, the whole world was discussing the issue widely. For comments based on facts and reason, in the spirit of seeking for the truth, no matter positive or negative, we have always willing to listen. But we are very disappointed and enraged by some Christian scholars, who used partially factual, and plausible-yet-false materials, piled into an article looking like a scholarly-report, with bold titles accusing NAMI of making a fraud, severely maligned and hurt this organization and the exploration team members.

就有關Randall Price 和Don Patton 聯名發表的 “A Critique of the Claim of Noah’s Ark Ministries International of the Discovery of a Wooden Structure on Mount Ararat” 文章,當中大部分資料都是出於捏造或揣測,串連一些本機構在不同場 合公佈過的零星事實(fragments of facts),加上一個起承轉合的佈局,重新編造事件始末,合成一份事件文章嚴重誤導讀者。現羅列文章中部分虛假指控如下︰

About the article by Randall Price and Don Patton, “A Critique of the Claim of Noah’s Ark Ministries International of the Discovery of a Wooden Structure on Mount Ararat,” most of the materials in it are based on creating or speculating a story line, by connecting the fragments of facts publicized by this organization at different situations, and put into a made-up beginning and end, and compiled into a document that misleads readers. Here below we list part of the false accusations:

1. 文章中以大量篇幅敘述Randall Price 到達我們發現木結構的地方(“NAMI Site”)。但從所提供的照片影像可見,那絕對不是我們所發現木結構的地方。

1.  The article used a great amount of space describing Randall Price arriving at the “NAMI site” where we discovered the wooded structure. But from the images provided, it is absolutely not the same place where we found the wooden structure.

Randall Price 和Don Patton 矢口斷言他們曾到訪我們發現木結構之地,並拍照為據,這一點明顯是有違事實,造假攻擊「挪亞方舟國際事工」。事實上亞拉臘山遍佈類似的山洞窟窿,從Randall Price 的照片背景只看到一堆亂石,完全看不見木結構;24 及25 頁中的照片Don Patton 手握一塊聲稱從“NAMI Site”取出的木板,有關該木板的來歷,我們無從稽考,但我們有理由懷疑該木板是他們刻意用作製造假證據誣衊我們。

Randall Price and Don Patton boldly declared that they arrived at the place where we found the wooden structure, and shot pictures as proofs. This is apparently contrary to the fact, and falsifying evidences to attack NAMI. In fact, Mt. Ararat is full of similar caves. In the background of the pictures of Randall Price, there are only rocks, and no wooden structure. In the pictures on pages 24 and 25, Don Patton held a piece of wood claimed to be from the “NAMI site;” we have no way to verify the origin of the wood, but we have reason to suspect that the wood is an intentionally created false evidence for the purpose of maligning us.

2. 文章宣稱本機構2006 年公開的石化木照片是造假,此指控實為荒謬。稍有攝影知識的人都曉得,照片中的物件顏色可以因為現場燈光及攝影技術而受影響,倘若我們如他們所言是刻意造假,我們為何要把石化木安排作實物展示?(註:該石化木的實品現置於香港馬灣方舟多媒體博覽館內作公開常設展出) 另外,他們對石化木樣本的所謂分析結論,乃是根據從照片中的石化木影像,透過肉眼觀察認為該物件『有可能是火山灰』(“possibly volcanictuff”),反觀我們所提供的報告是經過香港大學實驗室作專業及科學化的分析,有科學化驗報告支持。我們推算這兩位所謂的美國科學家對石化木的負面評價,是因為他們曾經要求將樣本帶返美國進行化驗,但被我們拒絕,他們認為唯有美國科學家與鑑識技術才是可信的,而漠視其他國家的科研人士的專業。

2. The article declared that the picture of the fossilized wood sample publicized in 2006 was a fraud; this accusation is absurd. Anyone with some knowledge of photography knows that the color of the objects in the picture can be influenced by the light setting and photographic techniques. If we were trying to commit a fraud, as they say, why would we display the actual object? (Note: the fossilized wood sample is now permanently displayed in the Multimedia Museum of the Ark at Mawan[1], Hong Kong). Besides, their analytical conclusion on the fossilized wooden sample was based on naked-eye observation, that it is “possibly the volcanic puff.” On the contrary, our report is supported by professional scientific analysis in the lab of Hong Kong University. We suspect that the negative comments by these two so-called American scientists is due to our refusal of granting their request of bringing back the sample to America for analysis; apparently they only trust the American scientists and their analytical technologies, and despise the specialties of scientists in other countries.

3. 文章指出Randall Price 曾訪問當地一位庫爾德族人,聲稱曾參與搬運木材上山搭建「佈景」造假,但在缺乏可以當面對質的情況下,對被指控者是絕對不公平。

3. The article said that Randall Price had visited a local Kurd, who claimed that he participated in carrying wood up the mountain to make a “movie set” for fraud; but without the opportunity to confront the witness, it is absolutely unfair for the accused.

他們以「保護證人」為理由不便公開被訪者身份,這種將秘密會面的錄音談話內容用作公開指控的做法,是對被指控者的絕對不公平,因為被指控者是被指名道姓,而證人卻是隨手拈來。其實要辯證真偽非常簡單,第一,有沒有真憑實據;第二,可否邀請當事人作當面對質;第三,將該段錄音交給當地政府及警方公開調查。

They used the reason of “witness protection” to hide the identity of the interviewed persons. This method of using recordings of secret interviews for public accusations is absolutely unfair for the accused, because the accused are publicly named, but the witnesses could be picked up anywhere. Actually it is very easy to verify the truth: (1) to have true evidences; (2) to invited the witnesses for face-to-face confrontation; (30 to give the recording to local government and police for a public investigation.

4. 文章以綠色和平(Green Peace)的方舟仿製品為例子,認為庫爾德探索隊員可以搬運木塊上山造假, 這是一個非常可笑及兒戲的推理。

4. The article used the mock ark by Green Peace as an example for the theory that Kurdish exploration team members could carry the wood up the mountain to create a fraud. This is a laughable child-play level reasoning.

綠色和平建造的仿製品位於亞拉臘山約2200 米的山坡上,是車輛及馬匹都可以到達的地方,經由當地政府批准下進行建造,仿製品體積細小, 並且只是擺放在山地上, 比較我們所發現的木結構處於超過4000 米的雪嶺上, 位置高約一倍, 無論在空氣質素與地理

環境上都有極大的分別,就算一個普通人也知道在4000 米以上的雪山進行體力勞動的難度,何況一個自稱具有專業資格的科學家?

The mock ark by Green Peace was made on the slope of Ararat at about 2200 meters above sea level, where motorized vehicles and horses could arrive. It is made with the permission of the local government, of a much smaller size, laying on the ground. In comparison, the wooden structure we found was on the snow covered mountains of above 4000 meters above the sea level; both the atmospheric pressure and the geography are strikingly different. Even a common person knows that it is very hard to work on the snowy mountains above 4000 meters above sea level, not to say credentialed scientists!

我們已先後多次澄清與Randall Price 所謂的「合作關係」,不過是一段非常短暫的時間,而雙方合作告吹的原因,是基於當地團隊對兩位美國人的不信任, 與及不滿他們二人傲慢和欺人太甚的處事態度:他們不容許任何的延遲或阻滯(包括天氣及政治等非人力所控制的因素),他們的傲慢態度可以從文章中略窺一二:Randall Price 知道合作不成功後表示: “how is it that they allowed the exclusion of the very people that could confirm their discovery to the world?”

We have many times clarified that our “cooperation relationship” with Randall Price is only for a very short period of time; and the reason for the breaking up of the cooperation is that the local team members distrust the two Americans, dissatisfied with their arrogant and oppressive attitudes: They do not allow any delays (even if due to the reasons of weather or politics that are beyond human control). Their arrogance can be seen from this article: Randall Price said after knowing that the cooperation is unsuccessful, that “how is it that they allowed the exclusion of the very people that could confirm their discovery to the world?”

當初雙方曾經承諾手上資料內容絕對保密,原因是恐防有人會嘗試盜取木結構內的文物,

如今他們違反協議,私自在網上公開木結構內陶器樣本照片,亳無誠信可言之餘,亦違反基本做人處事的應有操守,尤有甚者,在沒有得到我們的同意下,公開雙方的私人通訊及電郵內容,完全違反應有的基本道德, 這種不道德的行為令人齒冷。

We had an agreement to keep the materials in our hands confidential, for the reason of the fear that someone might steal the antiques in the wooden structure. Now they have violated the agreement, singlehandedly publicized online the pictures of potteries in the wooden structure. Besides having no honesty/faithfulness, this is below the basics of personal ethics; especially, their publicizing the private emails between the two sides without our permission is violating all basic moral standards, and this kind of unethical behavior is condemnable. 

Randall Price 使用大量沒有根據的消息來源,對要攻擊的人作出無中生有的指控,甚至聲稱有「挪亞方舟國際事工」的成員參與整個騙局,足以構成誹謗。凡指控者及參與散播這種指控而不加以核實的個人或機構,都同樣地構成誹謗罪,我們將保留法律追究的權利。

Randall Price used many baseless sources to raise made-up accusations to the people he attack, even claim that NAMI members participated the whole fraud; this is enough to be changed with the crime of slandering. All the accusers, and all the individuals or organizations who participated in spreading this accusation without confirmation, committed the same crime of slandering. We reserve the rights to pursue legal ramifications.

任何專業的學者、認真的基督徒都不會在沒有證據的情況下指控其他人造假,但Randall Price 卻多次在公開場合猜想我們探索的動機,在我們身上加諸罪名。假如我們要猜想無理攻撃者的意圖, 我們會懷疑當事人想藉著打擊本機構的名聲, 籌募自己上山探索的經費。事實上Randall Price 亦在網頁上多次籌募經費上山,我們本年四月發佈在亞拉臘山發現古木結構的消息亦有可能對他的籌募造成影響。

Any professional scholars and serious Christians should not accuse others of committing a fraud unless they have solid proofs; however Randall Price had many times publicly questioned the motive of our exploration, and piled up accusations on us. If we want to guess the motive behind our accusers, we would think that they want to raise support for their own exploration by defaming the name of our organization. In fact, Randall Price had many times raised support online to go to the (Ararat) mountain; and our publication of the discovery of the wooden structure in April of this year may have negatively influenced his support raising.

由始至終,本機構在方舟探索的工作都本著一個使命,要將福音傳給世界各地的人,彰顯上帝的公義、拯救。奈何有基督徒以「為正義發聲」為名,阻撓福音工作的發展,令人痛心疾首。整份文章充斥著與事實不符的指控、偽造的假證據、非經核證的揣測, 引導讀者將方舟探索概論為一個「騙局」, 對「挪亞方舟國際事工」的探索隊員、土耳其政府、與及當地的團隊, 是一個不公平的指控及傷害, 我們會保留法律追究的權利。

From the beginning to the end, the work of this organization in exploring for the Ark was based on one mission: to tell the gospel to the people of the whole world, magnifying the righteousness/justice and salvation of God. How come some that Christians, in the name of “speaking for righteousness/ justice,” work against the spreading of the gospel? This made us very painfully sad. The whole article is full of untrue accusations, made-up false evidences, unconfirmed speculations, misleading the readers to think that the exploration of the Ark is al-in-all a “fraud.” It is an unfair accusation and hurt on the NAMI exploration team members, the Turkish government, and the local team members. We reserved the legal rights to seek damages.

挪亞方舟國際事工

Noah’s Ark Ministries International

2010 年11 月25 日

November 25, 2010

www.noahsarksearch.net



[1] The name of the local place in Hong Kong is transliteration by Mandarin Pinyin, not Cantonese pronunciation.