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

  • Thread starter Thread starter rwillenborg
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
CWBetts said:
Like my own priest has said, if, hypothetically, the CHurch would allow the ordination of women, the first one million applicants should be thrown out, because they will be seeking it for the wrong reasons. Maybe it should be brought up that the priesthood is not about desire, but a calling.
Click to expand...
Wow, what a baseless assumption.
 
CWBetts said:
  1. They could have been dictated to a scribe, who then put in the account of Moses’s death.
  2. God, upon occasion, does reveal future events to his prophets. Just sayin.
Click to expand...
Why are there two flood stories and two creation stories if there is one author? Why are there obviously different interpretations of God mixed in? It is obvious to any scholar looking at it objectively that it was not written by one author. Please find me one non Jewish/Christian scholar that believes Moses wrote the Torah.
 
twinc said:
you seem to easily and rapidly go from one distortion and twist into another - to say that Noah could not or did not does mean that suitable animals were not on the Ark.This is clearly explained in the Bible for those who are receptive to clear explanations - fossils are not a natural development but the result of a sudden and catastropic burial etc - twinc
Click to expand...
Twinc, don’t forget all the glass jars needed for the 20 million species of insects. That extra weight needs to be calculated into the carrying capacity of the ark, unless Noah used an unknown plastic. And also don’t forget the weight of aquaria needed for freshwater fish who could not survive for a year in brackish water. And Noah needed an electrical generation facility for heating and light these aquaria, and for lighting the inside of the Ark itself. The electricity might have been generated by Noah’s sons and their wives sitting on stationary bikes, perhaps supplemented by solar panels after it stopped raining.

StAnastasia
 
donsnow said:
Hi, StAnastasia - Frankly, I think we’ll be better off with the dwindling but Spirit empowered Church, than a massive ‘feel good’ caricature of Christ’s Church. Don
Click to expand...
Don, you may be right, although it will be a heavy duty for priests who have four parishes like where my brother lives. In some of those parishes the priest consecrates extra hosts on the Sundays he is there; on the Sundays he can’t show up lay people conduct a liturgy of the presanctified using those hosts.

StAnastasia
 
CWBetts said:
Maybe it should be brought up that the priesthood is not about desire, but a calling.
Click to expand...
You’re quite right – vocation is the issue here. As fewer and fewer young men at called, perhaps God will call women to fill their shoes. Or perhaps that is not God’s plan.
 
buffalo said:
She wishes to be a Priest.
Click to expand...
Buffalo, vocation means calling, and while ideally a vocation matches a person’s desires, it cannot be reduced to a “wish.” I have no priestly calling; my vocation is ministering through teaching, not preaching or sacramental ministry.

StAnastasia
 
How did we get from the flood to the Priesthood:confused:.Shouldn’t we stay on topic?🤷
 
twinc said:
indeed it cannot,should not and will not happen and should not be happening in an Christian as clearly forbidden by scriptures and by God in his creation of woman with a double dose of xx female chromosomes to only represent woman kind and man with xy chromosomes to represent humankind[man and woman] - twinc
Click to expand...
This is your genetic argument against the ordination of women? lol :rotfl:
 
prettylarge said:
Why are there two flood stories and two creation stories if there is one author? Why are there obviously different interpretations of God mixed in? It is obvious to any scholar looking at it objectively that it was not written by one author. Please find me one non Jewish/Christian scholar that believes Moses wrote the Torah.
Click to expand...
The two creation accounts are complementary.

One is told from God’s perspective and tells us the order of creation. The second tells us the importance of man.
 
buffalo said:
The two creation accounts are complementary.

One is told from God’s perspective and tells us the order of creation. The second tells us the importance of man.
Click to expand...
They contradict each other. Unless you do interpretive jumping jacks based on your faith…

Ask an objective person that has no spiritual connection with the Bible to read the 2 creation accounts and ask if they could be describing the same thing.
 
StAnastasia said:
Twinc, don’t forget all the glass jars needed for the 20 million species of insects. That extra weight needs to be calculated into the carrying capacity of the ark, unless Noah used an unknown plastic. And also don’t forget the weight of aquaria needed for freshwater fish who could not survive for a year in brackish water. And Noah needed an electrical generation facility for heating and light these aquaria, and for lighting the inside of the Ark itself. The electricity might have been generated by Noah’s sons and their wives sitting on stationary bikes, perhaps supplemented by solar panels after it stopped raining.

StAnastasia
Click to expand...
Are you aware that the word “species” originated from the word “kind”? It is incorrect to impose the modern definition on the old. But you already know that don’t you. Yet you persist.

The internal salinity of all fish are almost the same. Their gills are adapted to handle one or the other. Some have kidneys that allow them to live in either saltwater or freshwater. There are aquariums that support both in the same tank. But you knew that because I already told you. Yet you persist.

The rest in nonsense.
 
prettylarge said:
They contradict each other. Unless you do interpretive jumping jacks based on your faith…

Ask an objective person that has no spiritual connection with the Bible to read the 2 creation accounts and ask if they could be describing the same thing.
Click to expand...
Catholics do not read the bible literally. You can argue this with Protestants but not here.

You show ignorance of Catholic teaching and understanding of this. Your atheist sources are ignorant and need to be updated.
 
buffalo said:
Are you aware that the word “species” originated from the word “kind”? It is incorrect to impose the modern definition on the old. But you already know that don’t you. Yet you persist. The internal salinity of all fish are almost the same. Their gills are adapted to handle one or the other. Some have kidneys that allow them to live in either saltwater or freshwater. There are aquariums that support both in the same tank. But you knew that because I already told you. Yet you persist. The rest in nonsense.
Click to expand...
Buffalo, your creation science sources are lying to you. Just face it: you are being left in the dust by both science and theology. “Flood geology” is not a science; it’s nothing but a playground for cranks, like Wicca, magic, astrolgoy, alchemy, and oija boards. When was the last time a scientific society seriously discussed Noah’s Flood in a geology or hydrology convention? You can’t include the Institute for Creation Research.
 
buffalo said:
Catholics do not read the bible literally. You can argue this with Protestants but not here.

You show ignorance of Catholic teaching and understanding of this. Your atheist sources are ignorant and need to be updated.
Click to expand...
LOL. That is the argument you came up with? Since the story is not to be taken literally, we should completely ignore the fact that there are two different creation stories that contradict each other AND portray God completely differently?

And my sources are not atheist for this. I would say that the GREAT majority of Christian scholars don’t believe that Moses wrote the Torah. I am pretty sure people started realizing that well over 100 years ago.
 
prettylarge said:
And my sources are not atheist for this. I would say that the GREAT majority of Christian scholars don’t believe that Moses wrote the Torah. I am pretty sure people started realizing that well over 100 years ago.
Click to expand...
I am an historical theologian, not a biblical scholar, but I know quite a few The American Academy of Religion (AAR) meets annually with the Society of Biblical literature each year, and I’ve yet to meet a member of the SBL or the AAR who assumes literal Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch.
 
buffalo said:
I have an exercise. Can anyone write a novel as long as the OT and completely exclude history or scientific truths? None, not one bit! Let’s go for it.
Click to expand...
What could possibly be the point of your exercise? Even the OT is not one long novel.

The OT is a collection of books with various kinds of literary genres; prophetic, historical, legal, didactic, psalms, proverbs, songs, parables (Jonah), allegory, and more. There is much history in the OT, though most of it differs from our concept of history. And there is much in the OT that should not be considered history.

How much scientific truth is contained in these biblical books written by and for a people who believed in a pre-scientific cosmology? Methinks you are trying to squeeze blood out of a turnip!
 
StAnastasia said:
Buffalo, your creation science sources are lying to you. Just face it: you are being left in the dust by both science and theology. “Flood geology” is not a science; it’s nothing but a playground for cranks, like Wicca, magic, astrolgoy, alchemy, and oija boards. When was the last time a scientific society seriously discussed Noah’s Flood in a geology or hydrology convention? You can’t include the Institute for Creation Research.
Click to expand...
Nowhere did I quote a creationist source.

I simply pointed out the flaws in your two points because they are not valid arguments.

And you will note and should admit that I very rarely link or use “creationist” web sites.
 
prettylarge said:
LOL. That is the argument you came up with? Since the story is not to be taken literally, we should completely ignore the fact that there are two different creation stories that contradict each other AND portray God completely differently?

And my sources are not atheist for this. I would say that the GREAT majority of Christian scholars don’t believe that Moses wrote the Torah. I am pretty sure people started realizing that well over 100 years ago.
Click to expand...
He didn’t write it - he compiled it. There is a big difference.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top