December 3, 2020

From Liberty Mountain to Mt. Ararat (or Send Me The Money Instead)

UPDATE: “Laugh or else” is a category that ought to only be used by people with a sense of humor. All others just stay clear. Apparently poking fun at Ark hunters qualifies me as an angry, Bible rejecting heretic. Well, I’d like to thank all the little people who made this possible…

Since we’re talking about religion and science, let’s see what Baptists are up to.

It has to make you feel good that Liberty University- practically a Southern Baptist School and the recipient of thousands of dollars and students from trusting Southern Baptists- has employed its very own Indiana Jones, who is off to do guess what?

Guess. Really. Guess.

Thank you. Find Noah’s Ark.

A Kurdish shepherd told the ark hunters that he had seen the ark, and even climbed on top of it, when he was a boy.

The team hypothesizes that the ark is preserved in several pieces beneath a glacier on the mountain, and every so often the glacier recedes, exposing part of the vessel.

“That’s when he saw it as a boy,” Price said, adding that they had interviewed the shepherd and could find no reason to distrust him.

The shepherd asked for nothing in return, and agreed to lead Bright to the site where he said he had seen the ark.

Bright first climbed to the site in September. Then a team including Price, the shepherd, a mountaineer and several others made a follow-up ascent to 15,000 feet later the same month.

They found the spot, Price said, but it now is covered by an estimated 60-foot-deep pile of boulders. Price believes the landslide may have resulted from attacks against Kurdish rebels on the mountain, or perhaps from explosives that were set off to cover up the ark.

Wow. The chills are going up my spine. Almost like the first time I watched “The Search for Noah’s Ark” on tv.

Somewhere in the archives around here is a box of “Bible teaching” material that I’ve quietly managed to not use. Donated materials. Inherited material. And there’s no less than three videos on the “search” for Noah’s Ark in that box. There must be a convention somewhere of Ark hunters. The Omaha Holiday Inn? Somewhere.

It’s under a glacier. Jimmy Carter may have seen it. A Russian princess wore a piece of it around her neck. One resident climbed on it with his father, and saw stalls. It’s been seen by satellites, and pilots. It’s petrified. It’s in pieces. It’s down. It’s up. It’s in pieces. Every different sighting is different piece. (Bet you didn’t know that.)

It’s evangelicals’ version of Nessie and Sasquatch is what it is. Plus, it’s a great way to set your kids up to dump their Christianity as well. Two for the price of one.

My favorite section in bold.

Price estimated that the team needs to raise about $60,000 to pay for permission to use the site, to buy the necessary machinery and to fund about two months of work on location.

Bright said a discovery would “mean so much to so many, many people worldwide.”

“Keep your ear to the road, so to speak, this summer,” he said. “Because there will be discovery. The only thing that’s holding us back is to finance the machinery that we need.”

I don’t know about keeping your ear to the road, but I’d keep my eye on my wallet. I have a feeling some of that $60,000 may wind up in the local Turkish economy. (If you don’t get this, read Bruce Feiller’s Walking the Bible and his experiences with the locals on Mt. Ararat.)

What would mean a lot to some people is one more television documentary and one more book for sale to a few thousand evangelicals.

I don’t know anyone whose faith journey is waiting for a chunk of wood with “Noah was here” carved on the side to be finally judged as worthwhile.

In fact, this sort of “prove the Bible” mentality does an outright disservice to the discussion of the Bible’s truthfulness and authority. If you aren’t saying you have to have scientific evidence to judge that the story is truly inspired by God, then what are you saying.

I see that Mr. Price gets a check from the good Baptists at Liberty University as director of their Judaic Studies department. I’m sure Jewish scholars everywhere want to get that address.

Well, to all of those who are willing to donate the $60,000 for Dr. Jones….uh Mr. Price to go Ark hunting, I’d like to suggest you send the money to me. I could actually use the money to relieve my school of my salary, live modestly and allow me to teach the Bible to my students for several years. If you need a piece of Noah’s Ark, I can probably come up with something equally impressive as Mr. Price. God may have shown me that some of the old lumber in our barn came from the Ark. Or was it the temple? I forget.

It’s good to know that Liberty University is continuing the quality of evangelical scholarship we’ve come to expect from Baptist fundamentalists. Who says America’s conservative Bible believers haven’t created a great university?

Comments

  1. Terri-
    I think people often prefer the substitute to the real thing. The Jews who kept the bronze serpent to worship instead of waiting for the One who would be lifted up. I guess people don’t realize that they already have the ark if they have Jesus.

  2. Brian, does the Bible really say Urartu instead of Ararat? In my admittedly brief research, the Hebrew word in Gen 8:4 is אֲרָרָט

    Isn’t this pronounced “a-ra-ra-t”?

    I agree that the ark probably landed somewhere in eastern Anatolia (and probably decomposed long long ago), which is where the kingdom of Urartu was, at a later point in history.

    But the Kingdom of Urartu didn’t really exist until the period of the Judges at the earliest, so it seems unlikely that Moses would be using it as a reference point several centuries before it even existed.

    Most likely, the Kingdom of Urartu took its name from the Mountains of Ararat, and not the other way around.

    Granted, I could be way off.

  3. One additional note: I suppose it’s a possibility that later editors after Moses could have “updated” the place name, as is the case with Laish/Dan in the Pentateuch…

    Still, the Hebrew word in chapter is אֲרָרָט

  4. Headless Unicorn Guy says

    I think there’s something to be said of people’s desire to have some thing to touch, grasp, gaze at, or meditate upon.

    So much of our belief and faith is intangible, that perhaps it is only human nature to try and put a thing to it…Something to point at and say we touched an object which someone holy touched. — Terri

    I’m RCC, and that’s the rationale behind the Church’s teachings and use of Sacraments, Sacramentals, and Relics. A spiritual truth has more impact when you see it acted out physically and tangibly.

  5. willoh, regarding the True Cross, Calvin is supposed to have made the original joke about all the alleged fragments being enough to have built a ship. And indeed, faking relics for fun and profit was a plague – see Chaucer’s Pardoner for a sample of the breed.

    On the other hand, there was someone obsessive enough/fed-up enough (you decide!) to catalogue all the relics: Charles Rohault de Fleury, a 19th century French architect. He drew up a catalogue of all known relics of the True Cross and in his 1870 book, “Mémoire sur les instruments de la Passion” claimed that “the fragments of the Cross brought together again would not reach one-third that of a cross which has been supposed to have been three or four meters in height, with transverse branch of two meters wide, proportions not at all abnormal. He calculated: supposing the Cross to have been of pine-wood (based on his microscopic analysis of the fragments) and giving it a weight of about seventy-five kilograms, we find the original volume of the cross to be .178 cubic meters. The total known volume of known relics of the True Cross, according to his catalogue, amounts to approximately .004 cubic meters (more specifically 3,942,000 cubic milimeters), leaving a volume of .174 cubic meters lost, destroyed, or otherwise unaccounted for.”

    On the third hand, there is a relic of the Cross in Holycross Abbey, Thurles, Co. Tipperary (which I have seen myself). It’s the tiniest splinter imaginable – some mediaeval churches may have had huge chunks, but if we’re talking pieces the size of the one I’ve seen, then you could indeed have hundreds spread throughout Europe.

    I’m not sayin’ we do have the genuine article next door, I’m just sayin’ polemical exaggeration for the sake of sectarian point-scoring is not reliable as a scientific measurement of cubic volume 🙂

    As regards Noah’s ark – yeah, if some guy is saying there was enough of it left for him to clamber about on as a kid, I’m very suspicious. Particularly when it’s been covered by a convenient rock fall – and I *love* the requisite conspiracy theory element of “perhaps from explosives that were set off to cover up the ark.”

  6. Headless Unicorn Guy says

    should we look for the wise mans house upon the rock somewhere in the mediterranean? can we use the gospels for clues to its location? — Graceshaker

    Only if you’re the “Dake” who wrote the side commentary on Dake’s Annotated Bible or one of his fanboys. I remember that “annotation” specifically — guy was so literalist he thought and taught that ALL the Parables were literal fact, courtesy of Christ’s Omniscience. Couldn’t seem to grasp what Chesterton called “the difference between false fact and true fiction”.

  7. Mr. Snapp:

    I didn’t call him dumb. And I have no idea if he will find a wooden boat or not.

    I would say some other things, but you’ve failed the “laugh or else” test.

    ms

  8. Ky boy but not now says

    “Hmm, in passing, I actually have no problem with people who wish to look for historical evidence and even raise money for it, provided they actually follow sound methods of investigation. I do worry about the charlatans who prey on the unwary. But, I do not worry about the idealists. Sometimes idealists can be quite right, though I may not think so in this case.”

    The problem is with people like my mother. She’s literally almost lost her house twice in the last decade. And she gives LOT’s of money to folks like this. And no one can reason with her about which ones are worth the money or which ones are not. As my brother says “she does what anything her current favorite blue haired preacher says to do”. (Local version of TBN.)

  9. One more note, Mr. Snapp, Austin, etc.

    Something tells me that if I ridiculed the Catholic idea of a flying house- something I did in the Cardinal O’Connor post specifically- called the people who defend it superstituious and fruitcakes, you’d be applauding me for standing up for Protestant principles. So as long as our relic is in the Bible, we’re good. Right?

    What’s good for the Catholic goose is good for the Protestant gander. Pot, meet kettle.

    ms

  10. A Flying House?

    Seriously?

    Man, I’m missing all kinds of pertinent information in my head.

    Were there any munchkins living in the vicinity of this flying house?

    🙂

  11. C. A. Johnson says

    I never ceased to be amazed at what passes for scholarship at Liberty University. It’s a real shame that this sort of misappropriation of funds and self aggrandizement only discredits Christianity as a whole as most secular people lump us altogether as monkeys in the same barrel.

    Be that as it may, I loved the line about, “adding that they had interviewed the shepherd and could find no reason to distrust him”. Silly Gringo, you missed the Fountain of Youth on the way in.

  12. As a Liberty U. grad let me say that the “History of Life” course I was required to take did not convince me of the YEC position it espoused. I am ashamed that my alma mater would waste time on such projects…but not surprised. I would commend to you all an excellent blog http://www.blog.beyondthefirmament.com/. Mr. Glover has also written a helpful book that I recently read and found very informative.

  13. Michael: First of all I am definitely passing the laugh test. And passing and passing.

    Austin, Mr Snapp, and Anne: Christ performed many miracles in front of the Jews. They still did not believe. They would just want more.(John 10:32-42) It’s the same with finding an ark or even Noah’s bones, they still would not believe.

  14. C.A. Johnson:

    Just a note that I was careful to not imply that Liberty is paying for this. Price is employed by LU, but this appears to be a private project, though obviously with the university’s blessing.

    peace

    ms

  15. Well, I thought it was hilarious!

  16. I tend to be too busy preaching, praying and pastoring to worry about where the ark is, etc. Might as well laugh to keep from crying.
    Blessings. P.S. Am a regular reader, often disagreer probably not a real word), occasional commentor who really enjoys your insight Michael.

  17. terri, this is why Our Lady of Loreto is (one of) the patron(s) of air travel!

    “Patron Of: Air Crews, Aircraft Pilots, Aviators, Construction Workers, Flyers, Flying, Home Builders, Lace Makers.

    The title Our Lady of Loreto refers to the Holy House of Loreto, the house in which Mary was born, and where the Annunciation occurred, and to an ancient statue of Our Lady which is found there. Tradition says that a band of angels scooped up the little house from the Holy Land, and transported it first to Tersato, Dalmatia in 1291, Reananti in 1294, and finally to Loreto, Italy where it has been for centuries. It was this flight that led to her patronage of people involved in aviation, and the long life of the house that has led to the patronage of builders, construction workers, etc.”

    Some spoilsports maintain that the ‘angels’ were actually an Italian family called D’Angeli who dismantled and transported the house by ship as a relic, but c’mon: flying house carried by angels versus pile of bricks in hold of Italian ship? Which are you going to believe? 🙂

    (Me, I’m sticking with St. Christopher as the patron of travellers).

  18. The Bible doesn’t say where the ark landed.

    Believers don’t need to find it to believe in it but unbbelievers would discount it some way even if it was found intact. So basically searching for it is a waste of money, but I doubt any young people will be turned away from the Lord because some people waste time and money searching for it.

  19. Funny how the Holy House of Loreto just *doesn’t* come up in art history classes – seriously! Which, given the fact that so much Western art (up ’til the 18th c., at least) is full of Biblical and saint-related imagery, it’s pretty telling (to me, at least) that I’d never heard of the place before coming across iMonk’s post on it. (Though I should add that I didn’t specialize in Western Christian art, let alone Italian art, so I might have missed something along the way… ;))

    At any rate, it seems like most of the professionals who did the most with/about religious art (Erwin Panofsky, Rudolph Wittkower and Emile Mâle, to name just three) skipped it, entirely, AFAIK. (And other shrines like it, for that matter.) Verrrry interesting! 🙂

  20. I’m laughing like a complete idiot now. Great post Michael.

  21. willoh, “laugh or else” is a category that should only be READ by people with a sense of humor.

  22. Even taking into account the low odds of finding a wooden structure that has not either decayed or been “salvaged” into houses or firewood – –
    It’s not unusual to spend $60k on an archaeological dig based on interpretation of ancient stories and the hearsay of locals. You’ve gotta start somewhere. Hey, there’s probably someone of great reputation in secular academia looking for Atlantis right now.

    However, if that same Atlantis archaeological team said “there WILL be a discovery” this summer at “X” on the map – – and based on a local fisherman’s tale, at that – – then they would have all the credibility of Geraldo Rivera promoting Al Capone’s vault.

  23. e2e:
    The Holy House isn’t art – it’s actually Jesus, Mary and Joseph’s house from Nazareth. (feel free to insert the word “purportedly” in that last sentence if you want) It looks more like a small chapel or grotto than a house.

    And there’s a difference between the Ark and “la santa casa”. People want to find the Ark to prove that Noah was real, the flood was real, the Bible is true, etc… Catholics venerate the House because having Jesus’ house is awesome, kind of like having Babe Ruth’s bat in your den would be sweet. It’s not to prove that Jesus had a house – which we all agree he did. Noah might be a swell guy but I’m not overly keen on finding his boat. Relics are a matter of love, and frankly, I do not love Noah.

  24. e2e: Do a google image search, the holy house had quite a career in Renissance art. Doesn’t mean it’s true, but if it is a fake then it is a venerable fake.

  25. Also, I will say that there is a difference between building a tourist trap and collecting donations from nice little old ladies for an expedition. The pilgramage site provides something real, a nice vacation that allows one the oppurtunity to meditate on the Incarnation in a concrete way, whether it is actually Jesus house or not. The expedition to find the Ark…don’t really see that it builds people up much, and might even set people up for a major fall.

  26. @ Curtis: I realize that, but there’s a basilica built around it. although one major Renaissance name (Bramante) was involved in the architectural design, there’s nothing else in the basilica that rates high-level inspection (so to speak) by art historians who are trying to point out some of the most important Italian churches and associated artworks. Now, there are some truly striking paintings of the Madonna of Loreto – one by Raphael, and (my preference) one by Caravaggio. But the actual church + wall paintings and more seems to fade into the background… after all, there are thousands of churches in Italy.

    My guess is this: it might show up in eastern Christian icons, more so than in Western paintings and sculpture. (It’s clearly not as important in art as, say, depictions of the Icon of the Holy Face, known in the West as “Veronica’s Veil.”) The point, though, is that some relics *were* depicted a lot… to the point that most art history students have to learn to be able to recognize them. The Santa Casa is *not* one of them, though.

    @ Sam: thanks! I did find a few small paintings here and there, and it looks like the Courtauld Collection in London has extensive photos of the church’s interior. I guess little houses don’t have quite the visual kick that many other relics do. 😉

  27. …the holy house had quite a career in Renissance art.

    I have a sneaking suspicion that this is very much tied to the fact that it’s a pilgrimage site. Am sure people who specialize in Italian art would be able to cite a bunch of works showing the Sta. Casa, but that would not be me. (I concentrated on modern and contemporary art, back in the day.)

  28. Dear Michael:

    You didn’t call Dr. Price dumb; you only put a description of his proposed trip in the category of “Stupid Christian Tricks.” How silly of me to conclude that you implied that he was dumb or stupid. Anyway, it was a rhetorical question. You plainly encouraged readers to view Dr. Price’s exploration at Mt. Sinai as nonsense. (Imonk to Austin: . . . “this kind of nonsense.”) That’s an unfair (and perhaps uninformed) criticism. That’s why I’m not laughing.

    MS: . . . “So as long as our relic is in the Bible, we’re good. Right?”

    I wasn’t writing about relics in general; I was addressing specifically your belittling of Dr. Price’s proposed exploration of Mount Sinai. It is not inconsistent for a person to believe that Noah’s Ark could be on Mount Sinai, while denying that angels transported Mary’s house to Croatia.

    Plus, some *genuine* relics can serve as tangible reminders of the historical setting of events, individuals, and objects in the Bible, no different than museum exhibits. A distinction must be made between the search for objects which may provide some insight on the historical setting of Biblical events, etc., and the superstitious hyper-veneration of those objects, or an over-estimation of their importance. The “Pot, meet kettle” line does not have any force in this case, because of the enormous difference between trying to discover a feasibly discoverable Biblical object (Noah’s Ark) with the hope that the discovery will have an impact on people’s appreciation of the historical setting of Genesis 6-9, versus trying to convince people that Constantine’s mother found Mary’s house in the 300’s, and that angels transported it to Croatia in the 1200’s, and that you can make a deal for the forgiveness of some of your sins by spending a day penitently on your knees in Loreto, Italy.

    But all that is tangential to my main point, which was and is simply that your comparisons of Dr. Price to Indiana Jones, and of the search for Noah’s Ark to searches for the Loch Ness Monster and Sasquatch, are false analogies. Your skepticism about Dr. Price’s chance of success is understandable, as is your caution regarding the abuse of relics. But I do not see the justification for your mocking caricature of Dr. Price or your denial of any chance that Noah’s Ark can be found on Mount Sinai.

    Yours in Christ,

    James Snapp, Jr.

  29. Great read. I laughed… A LOT – especially the “Dr. Jones” part.

    My first “guess” (before I read Noah’s Ark) was Ark of the Covenant, but then, I realized everyone knows that’s in a non-descript crate in some government warehouse in Washington DC – at least that’s what the movie showed. 🙂

    Also, great blog overall. I’m fairly new to it, and I frequently find myself encouraged and challenged – sometimes to the point where my brain hurts. 😉

    Blessings.
    Steve

  30. @James Snapp

    This is nonsense. What does the Christian faith gain from finding the Ark, or any other purported “proof” of the validity of the Scriptures? Our faith is not irrational or lacking in proofs of various kinds, but ought we to go seeking them out? Is our belief in the Scriptures and the witness of the Holy Spirit so flimsy that we must make ourselves feel good by looking for and possibly finding archeological crutches for our faith?

    Just because Dr. Price is well educated, as you noted in a previous post, doesn’t prohibit him from doing something foolish. I’ve got no delusions that when I complete my Ph.D. that I will be fundamentally any brighter or less prone to error that I am now. I’ll just be a better educated idiot with all the same mental, physical and spiritual frailties that I currently posses.

    What does Dr. Price stand to gain from possibly finding the ark? Borrowing from the great scheme of the thieving underpants gnomes from South Park:

    1.) Raise $60,000 to dig up a possible location of Noah’s Ark
    2.) ???
    3.) Profit!

    Other than making Dr. Price famous and adding another piece of archaeological evidence to support the validity of the biblical narrative, what do we gain as Christians? Does it make God more glorious? Does it make the Gospel more effective? Does it make Scripture more valid?

    What do we gain from the work of Dr. Price as believers?

    -James Thompson

  31. Ky Boy but not now says

    In general this post is directed to James Snapp, Jr.

    I have no problem with anyone spending their OWN money to go looking for almost anything anywhere they want. I do have a problem with people appealing to the general public for funds for journeys (adventures?) such as this and taking on the “prove the Bible” label. This tends to draw funds from many people who just flat out should not be giving money to these causes. My mother in particular. The sheriff has been at her door over money issues but she still gives to things like this.

    Ray Vander Laan on the other hand travels the middle east doing documentaries on the lands and how they fit into various Biblical stories. But his funds are raised privately from people who can afford it.

  32. lol. (I don’t want to risk the “or else” :>)) Just a note on language. I really believe a contemporary analysis that contends that metaphor is the most efficient and essential way we truly communicate. Irony is a powerful metaphoric trope that emphasizes a propositional concept by representing an opposite position. That is not “hate-speak” or “anger”, but a way to say something that we will not long forget. Thank you, iMonk, for your teaching gift and your clever use of language. You hooked me long ago.

  33. @ Sam again (apologies to iMonk for the threadjack): I just found an M.A. thesis on the iconography of the Holy House, published last June. Maybe this topic has been covered by Europeans before, but it looks like it’s a relatively “new” deal for the US.

  34. Dear James Thompson:

    “What does the Christian faith gain from finding the Ark?” Well, what do Christians gain from books such as “Jesus and Paul: Places They Knew”? We gain some appreciation of the historical setting of events, individuals, and objects described in the Bible. The discovery of Noah’s Ark would do the same thing. It would indicate that Genesis 6-9 has a larger historical core than many people suppose it has. It would not remove the need for faith.

    You asked, “Is our belief in the Scriptures and the witness of the Holy Spirit so flimsy that we must make ourselves feel good by looking for and possibly finding archeological crutches for our faith?” The question is loaded: you don’t really think that authentic pieces of archaeological evidence that pertain to Biblical events, individuals, and objects are nothing but crutches. They foster a better understanding of Scripture, and help avoid misunderstandings. And that is something that the discovery of Noah’s Ark would do.

    You noted, “Just because Dr. Price is well educated … doesn’t prohibit him from doing something foolish.” I agree, but that does not make it foolish to look for Noah’s Ark on Mount Sinai. There is a possibility, however minute, that Noah’s Ark, or some other significant find, may be discovered.

    You asked about what Dr. Price stands to gain from the possible discovery of Noah’s Ark. As you mentioned, it could make him rich and famous. But that is completely superfluous to the point of my post, which is simply that the enterprise of searching for Noah’s Ark is not as unreasonable as Michael made it out to be, in light of ancient records of some boat or boat-like object being somewhere on Mount Sinai.

    You asked if the discovery of Noah’s Ark would make God more glorious or make the Gospel more effective or make Scripture more valid. Of course the glorious nature of God and the veracity of the gospel and Scripture do not stand or fall on the success or failure of Dr. Price’s search for Noah’s Ark. But try picturing a hypothetical 2009 in which Noah’s Ark had already been discovered on Mount Sinai in, say, 1809, and that it had been transported and deposited, piece by piece, to become a special exhibit in the British Museum. Looking back on the Ark’s discovery, two centuries afterwards, would you accuse its discoverers of attempting to make God more glorious, and so forth? Would you consider the exhibit a waste of time on the grounds that the discoverers became rich and famous? Would you say Christians who say that the exhibit helped them understand and appreciate Scripture must have fragile faith? Or would you say that the discovery of Noah’s Ark has, like the discoveries of some other Bible-related artifacts, led some people to glorify God who otherwise might not have done so, and that it has led some people who had doubted the story of Genesis 6-9 to take a more open-minded view of Scripture and the gospel?

    Also, to Ky Boy But Not Now:

    Unless you can provide some example of Dr. Price telling people to contribute to his trip even though it will cause a financial hardship, I don’t see how the tendency that you describe applies to him any more than it applies to, say, fund-raising drives by Christian radio stations, appeals-letters from universities and medical research centers, advertisements for charities, and so forth. The existence of unwisely generous people does not indict Dr. Price specifically, or responsibly-stated public appeals for donations generally.

    Yours in Christ,

    James Snapp, Jr.

  35. Ky boy but not now says

    “Unless you can provide some example of Dr. Price telling people to contribute to his trip even though it will cause a financial hardship, I don’t see how the tendency that you describe applies to him any more than it applies to, say, fund-raising drives by Christian radio stations, appeals-letters from universities and medical research centers, advertisements for charities, and so forth. The existence of unwisely generous people does not indict Dr. Price specifically, or responsibly-stated public appeals for donations generally.”

    OK. I’ll expand my criticism to 99.99% of the fund raising done on TV in relation to religion. The people on the asking end have a moral obligation (in my opinion) to not appeal to the weak of spirit and those who confuse giving to a cause with building up points for salvation.

  36. Headless Unicorn Guy says

    You didn’t call Dr. Price dumb; you only put a description of his proposed trip in the category of “Stupid Christian Tricks.” How silly of me to conclude that you implied that he was dumb or stupid. — James Snapp, Jr

    I’ve been using the term “Stupid Christian Tricks” — a subset of “Stupid People Tricks” — for several years. What else can you call a lot of crap like that mentioned in this thread? Or in a lot of IMonk’s rants?

  37. Headless Unicorn Guy says

    Correction: “Or as mentioned/described in a lot of IMonk’s rants?”

  38. Mr. Snapp,

    One quick question, would you think the same way if the same amount of money, by equally qualified researchers were spent on The Shroud of Turin, or Juan Diego’s tilma with Our Lady of Guadelupe on it?

    Thank you.

  39. Headless Unicorn Guy says

    The people on the asking end have a moral obligation (in my opinion) to not appeal to the weak of spirit and those who confuse giving to a cause with building up points for salvation. — Ky boy but not now

    Otherwise, you get another “When coin in Tetzel’s coffer rings…”

  40. Although I enjoyed many of your subjects, I stopped visiting this site due to your apparent pride. It seems to drive you crazy that anyone could possibly disagree with you, even under the category of Laugh or Else. I don’t agree with Austin, but exactly what did he say to get banned?

    Just goes to show me why I stopped reading you in the first place, go ahead and ban me too, maybe I will try again in another year or two. I doubt it though.

    MS, sometimes even the mighty imonk can be wrong.