Does the Catholic Church recognize the story of Noah and the flood as being literally true?

[SHW]

So is Luke 7:40ff. a parable? I asked you this before, so I’ll try one more time.

No, it is not a parable. It actually happened. Jesus really visited Simon the Pharisee’s home.

Luke 7:39-40
Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he spoke to himself, saying, “This Man, if He were a prophet, would know who and what manner of woman this is who is touching Him, for she is a sinner.” 40 And Jesus answered and said to him, “Simon, I have something to say to you.” So he said, “Teacher, say it.”

 

[donsnow]

So you must not believe that Mary’s parents are Sts Anne and Joachim, as the only evidence we have of them is in a non-canonical writing. Too bad the Church considers them saints!

O, good grief.

 

[buffalo]

So is Luke 7:40ff. a parable? I asked you this before, so I’ll try one more time.

And I asked what are the attributes of a parable?

 

[juliamajor]

Why include Thomas-- it is a gnostic forgery

I didn’t. But scholars often do. Scholars do not limit themselves to the Canon but study Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha .

 

[diggerdomer]

No, it is not a parable. It actually happened. Jesus really visited Simon the Pharisee’s home.

Luke 7:39-40
Now when the Pharisee who had invited Him saw this, he spoke to himself, saying, “This Man, if He were a prophet, would know who and what manner of woman this is who is touching Him, for she is a sinner.” 40 And Jesus answered and said to him, “Simon, I have something to say to you.” So he said, “Teacher, say it.”

Not that part, the “ff” part, the “story” about the two people who both owed a creditor.

Jesus didn’t say it was a parable.

Does that mean Catholics have to accept it as historically true? Or is it a parable?

 

[diggerdomer]

And I asked what are the attributes of a parable?

A fictional story intended to teach a lesson.

Didn’t you know that?

 

[diggerdomer]

O, good grief.

I agree

 

[peary]

If so, how could that be? And please, not the ‘All things are possible through God’. If I’m to explain catholic theology to non-catholics, I’d better come better equipped than that.
And if not, on what basis is it considered allegorical and not true? Why would Noah’s story be false, and our original parents Adam and Eve be true?
How do you reconcile the similarities between the story of Noah and other ancient flood stories?
Any insight would be most helpful. Thanks!

The Church is always open to Her own Scriptures! The Church has also been open to scientific inquiry. If through the authentic scientific method Science finds something as true, then the Church accepts that. The Church is concerned with the morality of scientific application of what it finds and applies.

The Church has never said that the story of Noah is false. The Church has not said that the story of Adam & Eve is false. Both could be true in the sense that they stem from actual prehistorical events which have come down to the biblical writers through oral tradition.

As a Catholic, I accept the story of Noah in the sense that it was probably an actual event thousands of years ago. I accept that the existence of Adam & Eve is also probably based on the first time human beings developed self-reflective thought and a moral order. I don’t find a problem here.

 

[buffalo]

A fictional story intended to teach a lesson.

Didn’t you know that?

Do you know what attributes are, or did you dodge?

 

[SHW]

Not that part, the “ff” part, the “story” about the two people who both owed a creditor.

Jesus didn’t say it was a parable.

Does that mean Catholics have to accept it as historically true? Or is it a parable?

Sorry, I did not understand what you wanted. I see this “story” as Luke 7:41-43 instead of Luke 7:40ff.

That said, Luke 7:41-43 or Luke 7:40ff is meant to be a parable. But, this does not mean that this “scenario” had never happened before in history. There were most likely actual persons in history who forgave their debtors, perhaps one person (or more) even with these same amounts owed.

 

[SHW]

The Church is always open to Her own Scriptures! The Church has also been open to scientific inquiry. If through the authentic scientific method Science finds something as true, then the Church accepts that. The Church is concerned with the morality of scientific application of what it finds and applies.

The Church has never said that the story of Noah is false. The Church has not said that the story of Adam & Eve is false. Both could be true in the sense that they stem from actual prehistorical events which have come down to the biblical writers through oral tradition.

As a Catholic, I accept the story of Noah in the sense that it was probably an actual event thousands of years ago. I accept that the existence of Adam & Eve is also probably based on the first time human beings developed self-reflective thought and a moral order. I don’t find a problem here.

It is Catholic doctrine that Adam and Eve were real people (the first “humans with souls”) and that Adam’s original/first sin is what alienated us from God.

 

[CWBetts]

Do you know what attributes are, or did you dodge?

Instead of quizzing, just come out and tell us what you think the attributes of parables are?

 

[diggerdomer]

Do you know what attributes are, or did you dodge?

I wasn’t intending to dodge, sorry if you took it that way.

Do you disagree with what I said? I thought I was responding to your question.

Additional attributes of a parable are, for instance, commonly understood to be: tells a story using concrete images that the audience would understand and readily relate to, some would suggest that a parable is designed to teach one point (although allegorical interpretations of parables are also valid and part of tradition), and that a parable should cause surprise and demand a response form the audience.

Does that help?

 

[diggerdomer]

Sorry, I did not understand what you wanted. I see this “story” as Luke 7:41-43 instead of Luke 7:40ff.

That said, Luke 7:41-43 or Luke 7:40ff is meant to be a parable. But, this does not mean that this “scenario” had never happened before in history. There were most likely actual persons in history who forgave their debtors, perhaps one person (or more) even with these same amounts owed.

Of course it COULD have happened. But are you saying we have to accept that historically it did happen, because Jesus taught it (and didn’t introduce it as a parable)?

 

[itinerant1]

Nothing in DAS tells us any part of Scripture is fiction.

Agreed. I think fiction is a risky and misleading word to use in reference to any Scripture because for us moderns “fiction” conveys the idea of something that is not true. We can safely characterize the Epic of Gilgamesh as fiction, if we so choose, because it is theological false. But we cannot refer to the Deluge and Noah account as fiction, even if we take if for not being completely historical, because the story contains undeniable theological truths about God’s covenant, justice, and mercy.

Accordingly a parable or any other figurative forms of language in Scripture may not necessarily have a strict historical basis, though some texts do, such as the truth of a literal first pair of humans in Genesis that defied God is just one of the certain historical realities of that figurative story; and Scripture always conveys a either a theological or moral truth, or both, whether there is an historical basis for the account or not.

The notion of fiction tends to suggest there is no truth in the text. And that is just not acceptable when speaking of inspired Scripture. Scripture contains God’s message in whatever literary genre is used to express His message. Furthermore, the word “fiction” does not properly identify any particular type of ancient literary genre used by the Sacred Writers. So, from just a literary standpoint it is not helpful.

It’s best to dispense with the word “fiction” as misleading and not very informative when discussing Biblical texts. A substitute literary term ought to be used, one that more specifically identifies the Biblical literary genre or form under discussion. If the text is a Divinely inspired fable, we should call it that, instead of a fictitious story.

 

[alongexpected]

Noah’s ark was real. The rainbow which we still see today is the sign of God’s covenant with Noah. Genesis 9:13-17

Do you really think that all seven billion people, and the trillions of animals on Earth right now are descendants from eight humans and a couple hundred animals?

Do you really think that the fields of astronomy, biology, anthropology, archaeology, and God knows how many other -ologies are wrong in their unanimous conclusion that the Earth is billions of years old, not the 6,000 that a literal reading of the Bible demands?

What most likely happened is there was a large flood in the Black Sea area some seven thousand years ago, and the humans at the time, who had knowledge of anything scientific, no means of communication over any long distance, saw this as a world-wide, end-of-days disaster by the hand of God.

Hell, there might even have been a guy named Noah who built a really big boat for his family and some lucky animals he liked as pets.

 

[CWBetts]

SHW;5955780:

Noah’s ark was real. The rainbow which we still see today is the sign of God’s covenant with Noah. Genesis 9:13-17

Do you really think that all seven billion people, and the trillions of animals on Earth right now are descendants from eight humans and a couple hundred animals?

Do you really think that the fields of astronomy, biology, anthropology, archaeology, and God knows how many other -ologies are wrong in their unanimous conclusion that the Earth is billions of years old, not the 6,000 that a literal reading of the Bible demands?

What most likely happened is there was a large flood in the Black Sea area some seven thousand years ago, and the humans at the time, who had knowledge of anything scientific, no means of communication over any long distance, saw this as a world-wide, end-of-days disaster by the hand of God.

Hell, there might even have been a guy named Noah who built a really big boat for his family and some lucky animals he liked as pets.

Actually mitochondrial DNA suggests the all humans are descended form the same mother.

 

[SHW]

Of course it COULD have happened. But are you saying we have to accept that historically it did happen, because Jesus taught it (and didn’t introduce it as a parable)?

No, I don’t believe that we have to think that this example was historical. It is a parable. He didn’t mention any of these people by name.

If He mentions Noah, Job, Abraham, or Adam “by name,” it is historical and not parable.

So many people do not believe that Noah had an ark and they do not believe that there was a flood which wiped out most of mankind and animalkind. I do believe though. And, since no one is going to change my mind, we will have to agree to disagree.

 

[twinc]

SHW;5955780:

Noah’s ark was real. The rainbow which we still see today is the sign of God’s covenant with Noah. Genesis 9:13-17

Do you really think that all seven billion people, and the trillions of animals on Earth right now are descendants from eight humans and a couple hundred animals?

Do you really think that the fields of astronomy, biology, anthropology, archaeology, and God knows how many other -ologies are wrong in their unanimous conclusion that the Earth is billions of years old, not the 6,000 that a literal reading of the Bible demands?

What most likely happened is there was a large flood in the Black Sea area some seven thousand years ago, and the humans at the time, who had knowledge of anything scientific, no means of communication over any long distance, saw this as a world-wide, end-of-days disaster by the hand of God.

what a vivid imagination and phantasy and asking us to accept the words of demons and men and reject the word/s of God - the answer to para 1 is yes as is the answer to para 2 if you are talking about pseudo ologies posing in the guise of true ologies,the answer to para 3 is global beyond a shadow of doubt for more reasons than one - twinc

Hell, there might even have been a guy named Noah who built a really big boat for his family and some lucky animals he liked as pets.

 

[donsnow]

SHW;5955780:

Noah’s ark was real. The rainbow which we still see today is the sign of God’s covenant with Noah. Genesis 9:13-17

Do you really think that all seven billion people, and the trillions of animals on Earth right now are descendants from eight humans and a couple hundred animals?

Do you really think that the fields of astronomy, biology, anthropology, archaeology, and God knows how many other -ologies are wrong in their unanimous conclusion that the Earth is billions of years old, not the 6,000 that a literal reading of the Bible demands?

What most likely happened is there was a large flood in the Black Sea area some seven thousand years ago, and the humans at the time, who had knowledge of anything scientific, no means of communication over any long distance, saw this as a world-wide, end-of-days disaster by the hand of God.

Hell, there might even have been a guy named Noah who built a really big boat for his family and some lucky animals he liked as pets.

Hi, alongexpected -

Actually, I wasn’t expecting you.

Yes, I think all the people and animals on Earth now are the descendants of those on the Ark.

I think there is no accurate way to date rocks; and that paleontologists’ dates are estimates; and that the other fields of science accepts paleontologists’ dates as basis for their estimates of solar system age, etc. Those ‘billions of years ago’ ages are only estimates, not hard data.
Astronomers use paleontologists age of earth to estimate speed and distances of galactic and intergalactic observations, I think.

There was a huge flood, where the Atlantic Ocean broke into the huge valley that has become the Mediterranean Sea, about 11,000BC. However, the Biblical deluge of Noah can be timed around 2,700BC - 2,500BC. Never the less, cultures and civilizations including China, Peru, Hopi, Central American and African tribes all have traditions of a global deluge. All that anecdotal traditions of global deluge satisfies me that Darwinist counter claims of many little floods is an anti-God propaganda trying to cover the truth.

Yes, there was a man named Noah and his family, who built a barge as big as a WWII USN aircraft carrier, to save his family and all those animals from certain death.

Why are you so skeptical?
You realize of course, that the same morals and theology are provided by the story, whether or not there was a flood and Ark? I choose to believe the historical nature of this Bible Story.
So, if I have not satisfied your skepticism, we can agree to disagree, OK? 'Cause I ain’t gonna change my military mind.:nope: