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

[grannymh]

You have missed most of the points in the excerpts I provided, especially from the 1962 CE, and by Fr. Jaki in “Bible and Science.” In identifying the genus litterarium of the Noah story one must take note of the scientific fact that a local flood cannot cover mountain tops.

A scientific fact is that a flood is mostly H2O. A lot of H2O can also be an event. The question is–does a description of an event have to be a scientific fact? Or will a creative description make the meaning clearer? (Think sports headlines.)

Blessings,
granny

Human life is sacred.

 

[itinerant1]

A scientific fact is that a flood is mostly H2O. A lot of H2O can also be an event. The question is–does a description of an event have to be a scientific fact? Or will a creative description make the meaning clearer? (Think sports headlines.)

Blessings,
granny

Human life is sacred.

I think you are making my point now. The biblical description of the flood need not be a scientific and historical fact. The universality of the flood is a creative description which symbolizes the fact that God’s justice reaches to the ends of the earth.

Whether one reads the universality of the flood as symbolic or as literal-historical, the message is the same. This is why the Church Fathers and other pre-modern exegetes who tended to interpret the Deluge as literal-historical still derived profound spiritual lessons from the story.

There is no substitute for reading the biblical commentaries of the Church Fathers. Yet, they did not have to deal with the kinds of questions raised at the present time regarding the nature of divine inspiration, literary genres, historicity, and so on.

Fundamentalists and creationists who insist on a literal-historical reading of the Deluge account discredit the Bible and the Church in the eyes of those who know there is no scientific evidence for a global deluge. Creationists do not the Deluge account correctly. In fact, in order to understand the background to the construction of the Deluge story, one must be familiar with the Epic of Gilgamesh.

One can and should study the background of various accounts in Genesis, but Genesis should be read as it was intended, as a continuous religious narrative of God’s dealings with mankind. Various accounts were woven together to form this long narrative.

You might be interested in the following resources:

1. The Two-Edged Sword: An Interpretation of the Old Testament by Fr. John L. McKenzie. No need to get the new reprint edition for $34.00. There are used copies available for as little as $2.00
2. Dictionary of the Bible by Fr. John L. McKenzie. An indispensable resource!
3. Gilgamesh Epic and Old Testament Parallels by Alexander Heidel
4. A Path Through Genesis by Bruce Vawter, CM.
5. Bible and Science by Fr. Stanley L. Jaki. Currently unavailable through Amazon. You can sign up to be notified of its availability, or buy a used copy and get scalped in the process.

 

[itinerant1]

The Bible would make for one boring book if it started by giving us information on how stars are born or how galaxies and systems of galaxies form. To explain all the factors that had to be met to even get to the point where God could take 6 days to prepare the earth for man (for the sake of literalists) is just very dry and boring stuff; unless you are highly intelligent and of a scientific nature.

Having said that, it just makes common sense that these stories are not given as science lessons. The physical scientific story of creation, or the technical aspects of the flood story for that matter, is a non-story as far as salvation history goes. Salvation history has different priorities that need to be explained to get us to understand the origins of the real information we need REVEALED to us concerning the relationship between God and man. So, allegorical stories are the best way to get us up to speed and on the same page so we can be taught by God to understand His purpose for the creation of the universe and the creation of man.

MonFrere

Agreed. Figurative language, including allegorical, can be a powerful tool. If Genesis 2, for instance, was written in scientific or philosophical language I don’t think that it would be able to convey near as much truth as the figurative language does.

I don’t dare use the word “myth” in this thread, in regard to any passages in the bible, because the fundamentalists will only allow themselves to think narrowly and exclusively of “myth” as something that is not true.

 

[itinerant1]

We are over 1,000 posts in this thread. Don’t they typically closed a thread at 1,000 posts? If so, we could be closed down soon.

 

[grannymh]

I think you are making my point now. The biblical description of the flood need not be a scientific and historical fact. The universality of the flood is a creative description which symbolizes the fact that God’s justice reaches to the ends of the earth.
.

Descriptions can be varied–agreed. But regardless of how one describes a real event, the real event remains real.

Blessings,
granny

The quest for knowledge is worthy of the adventures of the journey.

 

[itinerant1]

Descriptions can be varied–agreed. But regardless of how one describes a real event, the real event remains real.

Blessings,
granny

The quest for knowledge is worthy of the adventures of the journey.

That would be absolutely correct in regard to passages that have an actual historical basis, though that historical event may be spoken of figuratively only.

A problem often occurs when the reader mistakes which elements in a figurative account have an historical basis. For instance, we have a parable about the self-righteous Jew. The reader may mistake the characters, places, or events depicted in the parable as having an historical basis when in fact they do not. The only historical reality behind the parable may be the existence of a moral problem of self-righteousness amongst the Jewish population.

And it is to this problem that the parabolic story addresses itself. Insisting that the characters and events depicted in the parable need be historic is completely irrelevant to the meaning and indicates that one is reading the parable wrongly…

 

[Michael_Francis]

***Thread is over the 1,000 post limit and is closed.

---