Did Noah's Ark Exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter devonsams
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
More from Pope Benedict in 2008

Creation and Evolution: A Conference With Pope Benedict XVI in Castel Gandolfo, S.D.S. Stephan Horn (ed), pp. 15–16
The clay became man at the moment in which a being for the first time was capable of forming, however dimly, the thought of “God”. The first Thou that—however stammeringly—was said by human lips to God marks the moment in which the spirit arose in the world. Here the Rubicon of anthropogenesis was crossed. For it is not the use of weapons or fire, not new methods of cruelty or of useful activity, that constitute man, but rather his ability to be immediately in relation to God. This holds fast to the doctrine of the special creation of man … herein … lies the reason why the moment of anthropogenesis cannot possibly be determined by paleontology: anthropogenesis is the rise of the spirit, which cannot be excavated with a shovel. The theory of evolution does not invalidate the faith, nor does it corroborate it. But it does challenge the faith to understand itself more profoundly and thus to help man to understand himself and to become increasingly what he is: the being who is supposed to say Thou to God in eternity.
Click to expand...
Clay became man - ie., human the moment man thought of God.

Spirit arose in the world when humans said “Thou” to an unseen God.

What makes us human is our ability to be in relation to God.

This ability cannot be proven by geology or science, however, the theory of evolution does not disprove our creation by God.

This quote is not directly to do with Noah, but it points to the fact that we do not need to shutter our minds in order to see the wonders of God.
 
We need to open our minds as the church does to science and sacred scripture. It should confound any student of the word of the Lord that he could explain the deep non comprehensible facts of His nature to monotheisistic Jews but could never un- confuse us about how we really came into existence. Instead He went foward with the Genesis account.

One might foolishly insist that it was because," it was what the people already knew" and it was easy to understand". Yet the NT is FULL OF new teachings that “contradicted” the OT ways. Jesus had no problem telling the truth as Catholics like to do.
 
Catholic doctrine is as follows:

DOGMATIC CONSTITUTION ON DIVINE REVELATION DEI VERBUM
SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON NOVEMBER 18, 1965
  1. However, since God speaks in Sacred Scripture through men in human fashion, the interpreter of Sacred Scripture, in order to see clearly what God wanted to communicate to us, should carefully investigate what meaning the sacred writers really intended, and what God wanted to manifest by means of their words.
Click to expand...
To search out the intention of the sacred writers, attention should be given, among other things, to “literary forms.” For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. (7) For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another.
Click to expand...
 
Whenever there is a question about what do Catholics believe.
remember the creed
The Holy Spirit has spoken through the Prophets not to the Prophets.
the Prophets received visions from god not dictation from God.
 
triumphguy said:
There was no global flood.
There was no ark that contained all the creatures of the globe.

Genesis and human reason are not mutually exclusive - they speak of different truths.

"In the Beginning…" A Catholic Understanding of the Story of Creation and the Fall (Eerdmans, 1986, 1995), Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (Pope Benedict XVI)
Click to expand...
Even so, I think that I would avoid answering the question directly, even if I had a strong postion one way or the other.

I would talk rather about the spiritual meaning of it and how to apply what the story teaches into our own Christian faith and daily lives as children of God.

“I think what’s more importan that whether the ark actually existed or not is what God is trying to teach us so that we can be better Christians and eventually spend eternity with him” and then go on from there.

Wouldn’t that be a more pastoral approach? It’s just my opinion. That’s what I would do.

-Tim-
 
Geologists have come to terms with catastrophism. Uniformatarianism was the rule for a couple of centuries but no more.
 
TimothyH said:
Even so, I think that I would avoid answering the question directly, even if I had a strong postion one way or the other.

I would talk rather about the spiritual meaning of it and how to apply what the story teaches into our own Christian faith and daily lives as children of God.

“I think what’s more importan that whether the ark actually existed or not is what God is trying to teach us so that we can be better Christians and eventually spend eternity with him” and then go on from there.

Wouldn’t that be a more pastoral approach? It’s just my opinion. That’s what I would do.

-Tim-
Click to expand...
I know and I agree with you.

I just get tired of what SEEMS to be an agenda, when our Church is mature enough and wise enough to allow (and to ask) adults to use their intellects to pursue truth (not truths).

Our Church champions the proper use of reason, and faith and reason are not incompatible but are tightly bound together.

We are not a Church where we are asked to step into the abyss of faith leaving reason behind.

Reason shows us God at work in the world and in creation, and this (since it points to God) allows us to see the utterly awesome and sublime power of a God who created us from an outpouring of love.

God doesn’t trip us up with false evidence.

To deny scientific thought is to deny a source of wonder and truth that atheism seeks to co-opt for itself.

Science can ONLY prove the existence of God, but for Catholics to deny science denies this source of truth which is given by God - which is in fact the ground of our corporal being, since all science does is describe and explain that which is created by God.
 
Della said:
If they all had experience of a flood within their histories, it is physically possible. What you mean is we don’t understand how/why. That’s okay. We may understand it as archeologists uncover more evidence, but then we may never know in this life. The important thing is the lessons these flood stories tell us about God and man and our responsiblities to both. 🙂
Click to expand...
No, it’s not really physically possible. That was my whole point. Within 100 years of the flood, humanity went from eight people in the middle east to millions all over the globe? If every woman had a kid a year from 15 to 25, it still isn’t anywhere near enough time for such development to happen.

I really wish people would do the math before they claim something is plausible.
 
Could someone show me Church teaching from the last 60 years that says we HAVE to be biblical literalists: ie., that we have to be believe in the historicity and science of Genesis for example.

Also could someone show Church teaching from the last 60 years that says we must ignore science and intellect.
 
triumphguy said:
Could someone show me Church teaching from the last 60 years that says we HAVE to be biblical literalists: ie., that we have to be believe in the historicity and science of Genesis for example.

Also could someone show Church teaching from the last 60 years that says we must ignore science and intellect.
Click to expand...
Could someone show me this continuous teaching and understanding has been declared false? Only Magisterial documents allowed.

%between%
  • God created everything “in its whole substance” from nothing (ex nihilo) in the beginning.
    (Lateran IV; Vatican Council I)
  • Genesis does not contain purified myths. (Pontifical Biblical Commission 1909[1])
  • Genesis contains real history—it gives an account of things that really happened. (Pius XII)
  • Adam and Eve were real human beings—the first parents of all mankind. (Pius XII)
  • Polygenism (many “first parents”) contradicts Scripture and Tradition and is condemned. (Pius XII; 1994 Catechism, 360, footnote 226: Tobit 8:6—the “one ancestor” referred to in this Catechism could only be Adam.)
  • The “beginning” of the world included the creation of all things, the creation of Adam and Eve and the Fall (Jesus Christ Mark 10:6]; Pope Innocent III; Blessed Pope Pius IX, Ineffabilis Deus).
  • The body of Eve was specially created from a portion of Adam’s body (Leo XIII). She could not have originated via evolution.
  • Various senses are employed in the Bible, but the literal obvious sense must be believed unless reason dictates or necessity requires (Leo XIII, Providentissimus Deus).
  • Adam and Eve were created upon an earthly paradise and would not have known death if they had remained obedient (Pius XII).
  • After their disobedience of God, Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden. But the Second Person of the Trinity would subsequently pay the ransom for fallen man (Nicene Creed).
  • Original Sin is a flawed condition inherited from Adam and Eve (Council of Trent).
  • The Universe suffers in travail ever since the sin of disobedience by Adam and Eve. (Romans 8, Vatican Council I).
  • We must believe any interpretation of Scripture that the Fathers taught unanimously on a matter of faith or morals (Council of Trent and Vatican Council I).
  • All the Fathers who wrote on the subject believed that the Creation days were no longer than 24-hour-days. (Consensus of the Fathers of the Church)
  • The work of Creation was finished by the close of Day Six, and nothing completely new has since been created—except for each human rational soul at conception (Vatican Council I)
  • St. Peter and Christ Himself in the New Testament confirmed the global Flood of Noah. It covered all the then high mountains and destroyed all land dwelling creatures except eight human beings and all kinds of non-human creatures aboard the Ark (Unam Sanctam, 1302)
  • The historical existence of Noah’s Ark is regarded as most important in typology, as central to Redemption. (1566 Catechism of the Council of Trent)
 
Farsight001 said:
No, it’s not really physically possible. That was my whole point. Within 100 years of the flood, humanity went from eight people in the middle east to millions all over the globe? If every woman had a kid a year from 15 to 25, it still isn’t anywhere near enough time for such development to happen.

I really wish people would do the math before they claim something is plausible.
Click to expand...
We do not know when the flood took place or its exact locality. Many assume it was about 5000 to 7000 B. C. but that’s an assumption based on a literalistic interpretation of biblical geneologies. It may have happened much deeper in human history. So, it is perfectly possible, given a much earlier date. Mitrachondrial DNA shows we all descended from the same family group, so we certainly did come from a small group in the dawn of human history.
 
Della said:
We do not know when the flood took place or its exact locality. Many assume it was about 5000 to 7000 B. C. but that’s an assumption based on a literalistic interpretation of biblical geneologies. It may have happened much deeper in human history. So, it is perfectly possible, given a much earlier date. Mitrachondrial DNA shows we all descended from the same family group, so we certainly did come from a small group in the dawn of human history.
Click to expand...
It’s not really possible because evidence in the geologic record disproves it. But that aside, we were talking about writings from cultures all over the world mentioning a huge flood and someone was claiming this was evidence of a global flood. But knowing that some of these writings were made within a century of each other, we can know, based on my previous explanation, that they do not describe a world wide flood. If you’re going to go back much further in human history, then we don’t have writings from then, so it can’t be the same thing I was talking about.
 
buffalo said:
http://www.ldolphin.org/poppostfl.jpg
Click to expand...
You know it’d help a lot if you explained the reason you post stuff like this.

Regardless, I find fault with your graphic because it suggests, right away, that in one generation, the population of the earth went from eight people to approximately 300. That’s 75 children per female on the ark. 100 per female if you consider Noah’s wife to have already been past child bearing age.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top