C
CWBetts
Guest
Myself, I prefer the RSV-CE, though the NAB translation of the Gospel of John is good. My issue is with your own arrogance in the matter.
Does the Catholic Church recognize the story of Noah and the flood as being literally true?
- Status
A
adriancombe
Guest
Perceived arrogance. Easy on the ad hominems. I recall reading somewhere they were not permitted here at CAF.
Nevertheless, if I have offended someone, please let me know.
C
CWBetts
Guest
Not perceived arrogance. ARROGANCE. You have set yourself up as the arbiter of the legitimacy of a translation accepted by the Vatican. This is nothing less than self-righteous hubris. Stop attacking translations accepted by the Vatican and stick to the topic of the thread.
D
donsnow
Guest
Hi, catholic 1 seeks -
AFAIK, they haven’t found it yet, but still have 20th Century photographic evidence that it exists. It turns out that Mt. Ararat is stormy and harbors bandits as well as wolves, scorpions and serpents and has very windy climbing faces. Although I’m not aware of recent photos and/or pieces of the Ark recovered, that doesn’t mean there aren’t any. I just haven’t read any recent (first decade of this century) hardcopy about Mt. Ararat and the Ark.
A
adriancombe
Guest
Code:
You appear confused. There is nothing wrong with critiquing a translation - that's what scholarship is. Actually I was critiquing the comments, footnotes etc. There is no way to construe this as an attack, but if I left you with that impression, I apologize.
The Vatican posting a translation on their website does not constitute a de fide proclamation. My comments were on topic because someone posted an excerpt on the thread and led us to believe that they constituted the Church position (which is of course simplistic and erroneuous).
Carl, you cannot quickly or easily get to know someone in a forum like this. The folks who know me well do not perceive me as arrogant. If you think that merely disagreeing with an action taken by someone in the Vatican constitutes arrogance or an attack...don't worry, you will learn those distinctions during your time at Steubenville. Beyond that, if I expressed myself badly, I beg your forgiveness.
Finally, remember that both our profiles put the word Catholic next to our names, and there are a lot of folks here at CAF who are not even Christians much less Catholic. We have to set the example of charity here. Of course, if there is something you wish to tell me that might give the wrong impression in a public setting, there is a private messaging function on the forums here.
M
MonFrere
Guest
I don’t think this makes for an ironclad way of “sorting things out”. George Washington really existed – but the cherry tree story – “Father, I cannot tell a lie.” is pure fiction … HOWEVER - the point of the story is to demonstrate the integrity of George Washington.well yeah, i saw that and thought “well what now, is Christ an allegory?”
there is a terrible and tragic danger in seeing the Scriptures as “allegory” or “metaphore”. one can of course read the Scriptures this way, but they are written and progress in narrative in such as a way as to warrant a literal reading- Bible as history. including the miraculous and “impossible”, for nothing is impossible with God. (Matthew 19:26)
So, I can easily see how stories of true historical biblical personages can get mingled with fabulous stories. If heros of American history with its short 200+ year history can be associated with legend and folklore I don’t think it a stretch at all to consider this a natural way for biblical history to be passed down in the Holy Scriptures.
Concerning the idea of a worldwide flood - I’ve heard scientists say that since this happened in our recent past – considering the migration of animals - for this to occur according to the “laws of nature” it would be crazy to consider. How would a Noah know how the animal life of Australia - or India - or South America and all the various species of frogs or birds – and lets not forget the insect life that is the bottom line of the food chain for the creatures above them. (We know how cats and dogs fight. How would Noah know how these creatures from ecosystems totally unknown to him would behave so he could properly separate them.) How could this destruction to the “balance of nature” be recovered considering a worldwide flood.
I think the Church is trying to find that place where they can speak with authority (faith and morals - and the realities of a theological/philosophical nature) and to let scientists grapple with those things they can understand from the physical realm of reality. And, if I may be as bold to say it, when the Church sees that something was not as it seemed – when the Holy Spirit guides the Church to see what the true reality is – it is ALWAYS a victory for truth. And, as always, truth sets us free.
MonFrere
D
donsnow
Guest
Hi, Mon Fere -
Why do you accept science as an authority? Do you grant ‘scientists’ authority over what you think? It really has none. We’ve many of us agreed that science is a body of knowledge (now expanding exponentially). It’s men which use, or abuse or misuse that knowledge. The Church does have Biblical knowledge. Now, Mon Fere, you know better than I, that you can’t prove a negative. So, as long as ‘science’ pontificates negative assertations about stories in the Holy Bible instead of sticking to Mathematics, Physics, Astronomy, Chemisty, Medicine and etc, I suspect them. Why are the ‘scientists’ and ‘science’ mouthing something they know they can’t prove? It doesn’t make sense.
There’s also archaeological and paleological evidence for the global flood that ‘science’ tries to parry with claims of local floods only, when levels of flood debris have been found at the same level all around the world (Archaeology and the Bible sorry I can’t remember editor nor publisher nor copyright date, but I remember the title alright…read it in the early '60’s, so it’s been around awhile.) So, I think that the flood is true and so is the Ark. So did whom I choose to have authority over me and what I think, and he doesn’t lie: Jesus Christ.
M
MonFrere
Guest
I accept science as an authority because on the subject of science - they are the authority.
I think what they have to say concerning scientific matters should be given my respect and consideration.
I don’t think so, Don. They have done a great deal to make our life better and more comfortable. They could not do this unless the knowledge they postulate and the theories they devise are TRUE.
I just read an article that may be surprising in its results. Scientists were polled as to whether they believed in God or not. Over half of the scientists polled did admit to a belief in God - or a “supreme intelligence” or a “first cause”. A great majority of these scientists also believe in evolution. The problem is that when they begin discussing the moral or the theological they run into problems. Then, they are guilty of speaking out of their area of expertise. The Holy Scriptures are part of our Sacred Tradition. They are God’s Revelation to man. God doesn’t reveal to us scientific data that we can find out on our own. God’s revelation to man covers areas far more important that the processes God uses to bring us our physical reality. The Church has always been pro-science. Many of the great discoveries of science in ages past were done through clerics or other “sons of the Church”. In my reading, the Church is saying that many of the current controversial theories of science are not incompatible with the Revelation found in the Sacred Scriptures. When scientists say that a worldwide flood would be an impossibility because of it’s repercussions (on many different levels); I think that needs to be considered. Now, think about this for a moment. If all human life started again somewhere in the mountains of Turkey only about 4.500 years ago shouldn’t we be able to track the migration of men that would radiate outward from that geographical point in Turkey? I would say that this would need to be part of the evidence we should find in the historical/geological/anthropological record.
I think “better science” has concluded differently. One thing the Church has never been is anti-intellectual. The Church and the Vatican will always seek out would class authorities to gather information to make their conclusions of scientific matters (as well as other authorities on other fields of study). The Church draws lines in the sand in matters of life, in matters of marriage, in matters of saying what is sinful and what is not. But the Church has made no lines in the sand in matters to scientists who say a literal reading of Gen 1-10 is scientifically impossible because it goes against nature – of course, the God of the Bible is the God of the Church is the God of nature. The Church likes to believe as the first probability that God would not make processes and laws that He would then totally disregard and work against. Miracles are generally a display of God’s power FOR THE SAKE OF MAN – and a literal reading of Gen 1-10 with all the “miraculous” intervening that God would have required to do goes against this basic principle. And like I tried to demonstrate in my last post - just because there may be some “fabulous” elements in Gen 1-10 it doesn’t mean that the individuals listed in those chapters were not literal historical figures. Remember my point about George Washington and the cherry tree.
MonFrere
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Really? How do you know the Vatican is simply passing on something from the USCCB? The NAB was not something decreed by the USCCB. I find your claim very hard to believe, I would really appreciate more detail. Thanks.
D
diggerdomer
Guest
Of course not.
But, it certainly presumes a certain legitimacy/acceptance, right?
Or are you suggesting that the Vatican posts on its website a translation of Scripture that is dangerous to the Catholic faith?
S
SHW
Guest
Regarding Noah’s ark:
Everyone has free will and can believe what they desire to believe, but the fact that they have free will to believe whatever they choose to believe, does not necessarily make their own personal beliefs “truth.”
Noah and his ark are mentioned several times in Scripture besides in the Book of Genesis. For the Scripture skeptics, there is also the scientific evidence of a worldwide flood (seashells found on top of mountains, in the plains, in the deserts, etc.) and persons claiming that they saw his ark on the mountains of Ararat where the ark is said to have “rested.” Genesis 8:4
As far as animals are concerned, there are only about 129 families. All animals “evolved/mutated” from these few families and representatives of all these 129 families would have easily fit in this ark since it was huge (450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high which is three stories high). creationtips.com/arksize.html
As far as insects and plants are concerned, God preserved their “lives” during the flood since He caused the flood in the first place and His purpose for the flood was to kill only flesh. Perhaps the insects were put into a hibernation phase until after the flood waters receded. And, we know that the plants survived this flood, since after all, the dove brought back an olive leaf to show Noah that the floodwaters were receding. Genesis 8:11
Scripture references show that the flood actually occurred:
Genesis 6:17
And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die.
God did preserve a few “flesh” (mankind and animalkind) on the ark in order to repopulate the earth after the floodwaters killed all the rest of the flesh on the earth. After the flood waters receded, these people and animals all left the safety of the ark and then continued to fulfill God’s purpose for them.
Genesis 7:1
Then the LORD said to Noah, “Come into the ark, you and all your household, because I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation.
Genesis 9:11-13
Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.”
12 And God said: “This is the sign of the covenant which I make between Me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: 13 I set My rainbow in the cloud, and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between Me and the earth.
Genesis 10:1
Now this is the genealogy of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And sons were born to them after the flood.
Genesis 10:32
These were the families of the sons of Noah, according to their generations, in their nations; and from these the nations were divided on the earth after the flood.
Isaiah 54:9
“ For this is like the waters of Noah to Me;
For as I have sworn
That the waters of Noah would no longer cover the earth,
So have I sworn
That I would not be angry with you, nor rebuke you.
Matthew 24:37-39
But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
Luke 17:26-29
And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. 28 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; 29 but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.
Hebrews 11:7
By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.
to be continued…
Everyone has free will and can believe what they desire to believe, but the fact that they have free will to believe whatever they choose to believe, does not necessarily make their own personal beliefs “truth.”
Noah and his ark are mentioned several times in Scripture besides in the Book of Genesis. For the Scripture skeptics, there is also the scientific evidence of a worldwide flood (seashells found on top of mountains, in the plains, in the deserts, etc.) and persons claiming that they saw his ark on the mountains of Ararat where the ark is said to have “rested.” Genesis 8:4
As far as animals are concerned, there are only about 129 families. All animals “evolved/mutated” from these few families and representatives of all these 129 families would have easily fit in this ark since it was huge (450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high which is three stories high). creationtips.com/arksize.html
As far as insects and plants are concerned, God preserved their “lives” during the flood since He caused the flood in the first place and His purpose for the flood was to kill only flesh. Perhaps the insects were put into a hibernation phase until after the flood waters receded. And, we know that the plants survived this flood, since after all, the dove brought back an olive leaf to show Noah that the floodwaters were receding. Genesis 8:11
Scripture references show that the flood actually occurred:
Genesis 6:17
And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die.
God did preserve a few “flesh” (mankind and animalkind) on the ark in order to repopulate the earth after the floodwaters killed all the rest of the flesh on the earth. After the flood waters receded, these people and animals all left the safety of the ark and then continued to fulfill God’s purpose for them.
Genesis 7:1
Then the LORD said to Noah, “Come into the ark, you and all your household, because I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation.
Genesis 9:11-13
Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the earth.”
12 And God said: “This is the sign of the covenant which I make between Me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: 13 I set My rainbow in the cloud, and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between Me and the earth.
Genesis 10:1
Now this is the genealogy of the sons of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And sons were born to them after the flood.
Genesis 10:32
These were the families of the sons of Noah, according to their generations, in their nations; and from these the nations were divided on the earth after the flood.
Isaiah 54:9
“ For this is like the waters of Noah to Me;
For as I have sworn
That the waters of Noah would no longer cover the earth,
So have I sworn
That I would not be angry with you, nor rebuke you.
Matthew 24:37-39
But as the days of Noah were, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be. 38 For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, 39 and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be.
Luke 17:26-29
And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be also in the days of the Son of Man: 27 They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. 28 Likewise as it was also in the days of Lot: They ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; 29 but on the day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all.
Hebrews 11:7
By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.
to be continued…
S
SHW
Guest
Continued:
Hebrews 11:7
By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.
1 Peter 3:18-21
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
2 Peter 2:4-6
For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;
2 Peter 3:5-7
For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which** the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. **7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Noah, his ark, the flood, and the rainbow are all “real.” The next and final cleansing will be by fire.
Hebrews 11:7
By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith.
1 Peter 3:18-21
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
2 Peter 2:4-6
For if God did not spare the angels who sinned, but cast them down to hell and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved for judgment; 5 and did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly; 6 and turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah into ashes, condemned them to destruction, making them an example to those who afterward would live ungodly;
2 Peter 3:5-7
For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, 6 by which** the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water. **7 But the heavens and the earth which are now preserved by the same word, are reserved for fire until the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
Noah, his ark, the flood, and the rainbow are all “real.” The next and final cleansing will be by fire.
D
dranzal
Guest
I have found the gospel passages referencing the flood to be particularly compelling. Jesus himself is referencing “the days of Noah.”
He should know…
He should know…
J
JP_Marat
Guest
Donsnow asked:
No, Catholics do that with priests, not scientists.
Sort of like the clergy?
It works for the clergy. They constantly mouth fantastic things they can’t prove either.
Why wouldn’t it work for scientists too?
JPM
RESPONSE:
No, Catholics do that with priests, not scientists.
RESPONSE:
Sort of like the clergy?
RESPONSE:
It works for the clergy. They constantly mouth fantastic things they can’t prove either.
Why wouldn’t it work for scientists too?
JPM
D
donsnow
Guest
Hi, Mon Fere -
Thanks for your response. I’ve given it a little thought.
, I get surly.
Continued in following post.
Thanks for your response. I’ve given it a little thought.
I respectfully submit that the government and private sources of funding for research, projects and expeditions weigh heavily on that authority. And, we people are represented by the government…some of our taxes go for educational costs and grants. We have a say, through the government, on how our tax money is spent. I hope science is not such an authority on science, that it and its scientists don’t have to answer for what they do.
Believe it or not, I respect science and the technology which it produces and which technology exercises a lot of the justification for science research. However, since I’m more music and history and Church and philosophy orientated than to the hard sciences, I give it a little consideration, unless its pushed into my face. Then, I tend to growl, until its out of my face. Yes,
, I get surly.Well, imho its engineers and technology which makes science happen. And, its not all good that science produces. I think factual theories can operate and be engineered, without touching on truth.
I would like to ameliorate what I am about to say. I’m glad that half the scientists recognize and respect a ‘supreme intelligence’ or ‘first Cause’ or God Himself. These are an exception, to the next two sentences. What I wonder, is what place does science have, to comment on sacred scripture? I think it has no place, commenting on sacred scripture. But this opinion applies mostly to aetheists and such. Why talk about what you don’t believe?
Continued in following post.
D
donsnow
Guest
Concluded from continued post
I believe that there is a natural process in Creation, which some describe as evolution. That’s a big difference than believing in it. Let’s put it this way, when I worked armed, I believed there was a service revolver in the holster on my right hip. But, I didn’t believe in that gun, for resolving ordinary contentious situations. Those scientists who believe in evolution, rather than believe that it is there, bother me. Imho, those scientists appear to run around, waving Darwin in one hand, and either try to make him fit anything they pick up in the other hand, or try to make anything they pick up in the other hand fit Darwin. I submit those types are a nuisance to the public, a danger to our children and a disgrace to the academic community. 
With all due respect, when science contradicts Holy Scripture, the only consideration I feel it deserves is the skepticism it usually dishes out. And, I’m not particularly interested in the servant’s (science’s) disagreement. That’s just me, one of those people who science should answer to, for what it does as much as anything that they claim is true. But, here I’m thinking about cloning animal genes into human tissue and other such abominations which are not the topic of this thread.
To me, “better science” is that which submits itself to service of humankind, without taking authority over people.
I believe that there is a natural process in Creation, which some describe as evolution. That’s a big difference than believing in it. Let’s put it this way, when I worked armed, I believed there was a service revolver in the holster on my right hip. But, I didn’t believe in that gun, for resolving ordinary contentious situations.
Those scientists who believe in evolution, rather than believe that it is there, bother me. Imho, those scientists appear to run around, waving Darwin in one hand, and either try to make him fit anything they pick up in the other hand, or try to make anything they pick up in the other hand fit Darwin. I submit those types are a nuisance to the public, a danger to our children and a disgrace to the academic community. With all due respect, when science contradicts Holy Scripture, the only consideration I feel it deserves is the skepticism it usually dishes out. And, I’m not particularly interested in the servant’s (science’s) disagreement. That’s just me, one of those people who science should answer to, for what it does as much as anything that they claim is true. But, here I’m thinking about cloning animal genes into human tissue and other such abominations which are not the topic of this thread.
Hmmm, good point. We can track human migration from Africa and from Asia Major, why not from Asia Minor? But, here, my geography fails me. How far are the Causcus from Turkey? There’s human migration tracked from there, in recent millenia. Could anti-Bilble bias have overlooked that? Remember, there’s two halves of scientists…half recognize and maybe respect a God, or supreme intelligence or First Cause and the other half don’t and seem to delight in covering up evidence of His Creation, and the record of that Creation in Sacred Scripture.
Neither am I. Believe it or not.
To me, “better science” is that which submits itself to service of humankind, without taking authority over people.I have the understanding that individual Catholics are free to draw that line. And, earlier in this post I stated I draw that line, and why. Also, in my mind, there aren’t too many miracles in Genesis, seeing as God was waging spiritual warfare with all the lesser gods which people followed in those days. That’s why Adam, Noah, Abram, Isaac and Jacob were such exceptions. They followed the God that nobody could see.
Thank you, for that, sincerely. Maybe I’m just not as broad minded as you are. And, Science is not my God and I realize now, neither is it your god.
D
donsnow
Guest
Donsnow asked:
Good afternoon, JP Marat -
I go along with most of your post
M
MonFrere
Guest
Here’s my problem with this. Let’s take the llama and the kangaroo as examples. These creatures are native to South America and Australia respectively. If the “Genesis kind” was preserved by a worldwide flood. We have ONLY 4,500 years for this “Genesis kind” to evolve into these two creatures that are indigenous to these native geographical regions. Each continent has its own unique family of animals. This just cannot happen with the theory of the “Genesis kind”.
You could also take this theory in reverse. How did the kangaroo or the llama get to the ark? or perhaps we shouldn’t get any more specific that how did those unique creatures that are indigenous to particular geographical regions get to the ark in the first place. I’m sure that these creatures existed before the flood. How did they get back to their native habitat - especially Australia that is surrounded by water. It seems that there should be NO ANIMAL LIFE there is ALL FLESH ON THE PLANET EARTH was destroyed some 4,500 years ago.
I still look at this as a scientific impossibility. The miraculous is one thing but for all this to happen you need a God who’s a micromanager with the entire universe and not the great lawgiver that can work his will without the need for constantly tweaking the universe that’s supposed to act according to the laws the lawgiver established to run the universe in the first place.
MonFrere
S
SHW
Guest
Oh, ye of little faith!
Thankfully, faith and the miraculous are not bound by the laws of science.
Since God sent His angels to translate the Holy House (of Mary’s Annunciation) physically from Nazareth to Loreto, Italy in the 13th century, I think that He easily transported a few animals from Australia or South America or elsewhere to Noah’s Ark in the Middle East and then transported them back again to their homelands after the flood.
catholictradition.org/Mary/loreto2.htm
Excerpt:
S
SHW
Guest
Evolution and Biblical Times
I started a thread concerning how time is computed for evolution and also the timeline in the Bible. Perhaps both the scientific and the Biblical are correct and if so, they are indeed complementary.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5998439&postcount=1
I started a thread concerning how time is computed for evolution and also the timeline in the Bible. Perhaps both the scientific and the Biblical are correct and if so, they are indeed complementary.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=5998439&postcount=1
- Status