Hi John, thanks for sharing and for asking. I may see it a little differently - you can tell me if it amounts to a disagreement.
Genesis 8:4 says “…the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat.” ESV
The Hebrew for mountain is “har” and its definition is provided in Strongs #02022 as “a mountain or range of hills, hill (country) or mountain” and in Brown-Drivers-Briggs as “hill, mountain, hill country, mount”.
It is also used in the plural “mountains”. It would take a pretty big ark to rest on the tippy tops of multiple mountains at the same time.
The word Ararat is Strongs #0780 referring to Armenia, or as listed in Brown-Drivers-Briggs as “a mountainous region of eastern Armenia, between the river Araxes and the lakes Van and Oroomiah, the site where Noah’s ark came to rest.”
So as the waters receded the ark came to rest somewhere in the foot hills or hill country in a mountainous region. It seems hard to claim that the Bible specifically says how high on the mountains it landed.
Next the Bible says v5 “and the waters continued to abate until the tenth month; in the tenth month on the first day of the month the tops of the mountains were seen.”
Here again, we have these mountains to deal with. If these are foothills, then it means the tops of the foothills. So the ark may have come to rest on a hill top that is still covered in water, as are the surrounding hill tops. It takes a long time for the water to recede to the point where a lot of little islands (other hill tops) poke out of the receding water.
Due to the curvature of the Earth and a totally unknown visibility factor that Noah may have faced, I really can’t make definitive statements about how far Noah could see in any direction. So when it says the “tops of the mountains were seen” I don’t necessarily know how far Noah could see.
So yes, the ark came to rest “on top of a mountain”, but only in the sense of being in agreement with the Biblical vocabulary that describes the ark resting “on the mountains of” - therefore implying at the top of a hill/mount that was taller than nearby hills/mounts in a hilly/mountainous area where more distant, and possibly even taller, peaks may have been out of sight.
To go beyond that would be to go beyond Scripture, in my opinion. What do you think? Is this different than your take?