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.
More: Noah’s ark is documented by Josephus who is a Jewish historian.
Ararat, the Cradle of Civilization?
In the first century AD, Josephus discussing the royal family at Adiabene, remarks:
Code:
  ...{in} a district called Carra {Carron} in Adiabene-roughly between the upper and lower Zab Rivers, tributaries of the Tigris…the remains of the Ark in which report has it that Noah was saved from the flood…to this day are shown to those who are curious to see them.
Josephus added that this land is rich with Amomom, an herb which grows there (known to grow in the mountains of central Iran). In the third century Hippolytus wrote:
Code:
  The relics of this Ark are ...shown to this day in the mountains called Ararat, which are situated in the direction of the country of the Adiabene {Iran}.
And possibly Julius Africanus, also writing in the third century, has this location in mind:
Code:
  ...and the Ark settled on the mountains of Ararat, which we know to be in Parthia {Iran}.
Another tradition locates the Ark in Persia (modern Iran). It was said to have landed in the area of Ecbatana (Hamadhan). A map in Calmet’s Dictionnaire Historique de la Bible (1722), shows the Ark atop this mountain, which it calls “Mont Ararat.”
More at: accuracyingenesis.com/ararat.html

http://inlinethumb53.webshots.com/3188/2630320830032786982S425x425Q85.jpg
 
40.png
juliamajor:
Wrong person? what kind of attitude is that uggghhh

Yup.It isn’t a history,or science .It’s about God’s Love of humankind in Creation.His Justice and correction in the flood.His Forgiveness and redemption after the flood.This is what truly is important.All else is superfluous.

Truth is never superfluous.
 
Yup.It isn’t a history,or science .It’s about God’s Love of humankind in Creation.His Justice and correction in the flood.His Forgiveness and redemption after the flood.This is what truly is important.All else is superfluous.
Truth is never superfluous.
IThe uggh quote isn’t mine.
Truth ? Which truth?The one that God loves us?
It is superfluous if it is misdirected.That the earth is is 45 billion years old or 6000 is not truth but an opinion- having really nothing to do with the Spiritual and theological truths contained therein.I keep asking what is Genesis really concerned with-what does it teach us,why is it important.I have yet to get a response on any of the threads.What is the purpose of the book.To teach you geology?is geology important to salvation? I don’t think so.
 
Truth is never superfluous.
IThe uggh quote isn’t mine.
Truth ? Which truth?The one that God loves us?
It is superfluous if it is misdirected.That the earth is is 45 billion years old or 6000 is not truth but an opinion- having really nothing to do with the Spiritual and theological truths contained therein.I keep asking what is Genesis really concerned with-what does it teach us,why is it important.I have yet to get a response on any of the threads.What is the purpose of the book.To teach you geology?is geology important to salvation? I don’t think so.

God is truth. Everything He pronounces is truth and is important. Otherwise one has to take a position that only some of God is important.
 
Dogs did “evolve” from wolves. Evolve is loosely used here. Perhaps it was by selective breeding much like what is done with plants in order to make hybrids, etc. Once the 130 distinct animal families had evolved and were present in Noah’s time, it did not take that much time to produce new species from within these families from mutated animals after the flood. Surely a couple of thousand years would be enough to get a large variety.

Jesus states “before the flood” so there was a flood. This is historical.

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 17:27
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.
Hi, SHW -

I enjoy your posts, and seldom ever disagree with them. However, this time, I want to put my two cents on Choy’s side of the table. Because, imo, the tables of from genus to species, appear as semantics, arranging the data to agree with descent of species. I have that view, because I think descent of species highly improbable in nature. No sense in us batting this around, too much, because I’m not trying to change you and I doubt I’m going to change my opinion for you 🙂
With that in mind, your reply, of course, will be welcome.
 
Truth is never superfluous.
IThe uggh quote isn’t mine.
Truth ? Which truth?The one that God loves us?
It is superfluous if it is misdirected.That the earth is is 45 billion years old or 6000 is not truth but an opinion- having really nothing to do with the Spiritual and theological truths contained therein.I keep asking what is Genesis really concerned with-what does it teach us,why is it important.I have yet to get a response on any of the threads.What is the purpose of the book.To teach you geology?is geology important to salvation? I don’t think so.

Hi, juliamajor -

Here’s my response to your asking what is Genesis really concerned with. I agree that Genesis shows God’s love for His creation and all the creatures in it. That’s the main purpose. It’s secondary purpose is to show how He created it, to glorify His majesty, power, wisdom as well as declare His love. Personally, I think the flood happened.

I would like to say, to both views, in closing, the same theological and spiritual truths abide and are available, whether or not there was a flood.
 
so how about this from www.SearchfortheTruth.org "as the Universe expanded,there was a point at which time was moving very rapidly at the outer edge and essentially stopped at the centre.At this point in the expansion of the universe,only days were passing near the center,while billions of years were passing in the heavens.This is the inevitable conclusion based on our current knowledge of physics and starting with Biblical assumptions instead of arbitrary ones - twinc
Sorry - try www.SearchfortheTruth.net instead - twinc
 
IThe uggh quote isn’t mine.
Truth ? Which truth?The one that God loves us?
It is superfluous if it is misdirected.That the earth is is 45 billion years old or 6000 is not truth but an opinion- having really nothing to do with the Spiritual and theological truths contained therein.I keep asking what is Genesis really concerned with-what does it teach us,why is it important.I have yet to get a response on any of the threads.What is the purpose of the book.To teach you geology?is geology important to salvation? I don’t think so.
Hi, juliamajor -

Here’s my response to your asking what is Genesis really concerned with. I agree that Genesis shows God’s love for His creation and all the creatures in it. That’s the main purpose. It’s secondary purpose is to show how He created it, to glorify His majesty, power, wisdom as well as declare His love. Personally, I think the flood happened.

I would like to say, to both views, in closing, the same theological and spiritual truths abide and are available, whether or not there was a flood.

Agreed!👍
 
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!
Yes, per our first Pope in 2 Peter 3:3-6 Catholics are required to believe that the world was destroyed by a world wide flood.

"3 Knowing this first, that in the last days there shall come deceitful scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 Saying: Where is his promise or his coming? for since the time that the fathers slept, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they are wilfully ignorant of, that the heavens were before, and the earth out of water, and through water, consisting by the word of God. 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished. "
 
Yes, per our first Pope in 2 Peter 3:3-6 Catholics are required to believe that the world was destroyed by a world wide flood.

"3 Knowing this first, that in the last days there shall come deceitful scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 Saying: Where is his promise or his coming? for since the time that the fathers slept, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they are wilfully ignorant of, that the heavens were before, and the earth out of water, and through water, consisting by the word of God. 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished. "
Two problems with this claim:
  1. The Catholic Church does not require Catholic to believe that 2 Peter was written by Peter himself. In fact, most Catholic Scripture scholars claim it was the last book in the NT canon written, i.e. long after Peter was martyred in Rome.
  2. The Catholic Church does not require Catholics to believe the historical fact of a worldwide deluge or flood.
 
Two problems with this claim:
  1. The Catholic Church does not require Catholic to believe that 2 Peter was written by Peter himself. In fact, most Catholic Scripture scholars claim it was the last book in the NT canon written, i.e. long after Peter was martyred in Rome.
  2. The Catholic Church does not require Catholics to believe the historical fact of a worldwide deluge or flood.
I don’t believe you on either point nor am I required to.
 
Hi, SHW -

I enjoy your posts, and seldom ever disagree with them. However, this time, I want to put my two cents on Choy’s side of the table. Because, imo, the tables of from genus to species, appear as semantics, arranging the data to agree with descent of species. I have that view, because I think descent of species highly improbable in nature. No sense in us batting this around, too much, because I’m not trying to change you and I doubt I’m going to change my opinion for you 🙂
With that in mind, your reply, of course, will be welcome.
Thank you for your kind words. 🙂 I’ve forgotten most of the biology that I learned 40 years ago so all I remember is that there were about 130 families and I definitely cannot name them or their identifying characteristics at this point in time. 😃

Some folks think that Noah’s ark could have easily accommodated 50,000 animals.
Doctors Morris and Whitcomb in their classic book,The Genesis Flood state that no more than 35,000 individual animals needed to go on the ark. In his well documented book, Noah’s Ark: A Feasibility Study, John Woodmorappe suggests that far fewer animals would have been transported upon the ark. By pointing out that the word “specie” is not equivalent to the “created kinds” of the Genesis account, Woodmorappe credibly demonstrates that as few as 2,000 animals may have been required on the ark. To pad this number for error, he continues his study by showing that the ark could easily accommodate 16,000 animals.)
But, let’s be generous and add on a reasonable number to include extinct animals. Then add on some more to satisfy even the most skeptical. Let’s assume 50,000 animals, far more animals than required, were on board the ark, and these need not have been the largest or even adult specimens.
Remember there are really only a few very large animals, such as the dinosaur or the elephant, and these could be represented by young ones. Assuming the average animal to be about the size of a sheep and using a railroad car for comparison, we note that the average double-deck stock car can accommodate 240 sheep. Thus, three trains hauling 69 cars each would have ample space to carry the 50,000 animals, filling only 37% of the ark. This would leave an additional 361 cars or enough to make 5 trains of 72 cars each to carry all of the food and baggage plus Noah’s family of eight people. The Ark had plenty of space.
The bigger problem would have been the construction of the Ark. But the Bible indicates that Noah did this under Divine guidance and there is no reason to believe he did not hire additional workmen. From:
 
Thank you for your kind words. 🙂 I’ve forgotten most of the biology that I learned 40 years ago so all I remember is that there were about 130 families and I definitely cannot name them or their identifying characteristics at this point in time. 😃

Some folks think that Noah’s ark could have easily accommodated 50,000 animals.
So how did we get to having more than 50,000 animals now?

Did that number include species that are now extinct (dinosaurs, etc.)?
 
Of course.

So what? Your relevant point to this thread is…???
I believe that St. Peter did write 2 Peter and Catholics can not just throw out his words because some “Scripture scholor” or some one posting in a forum says they are not his words.

Also, 2 Peter 3 is in the cannon of Sacred Scripture and if you hold the belief that there was not a World Wide Flood, Sacred Scripture and St. Peter is calling you a “decietful scoffer” and “ignorant”. These are strong words and Catholics can not take them lightly and just disregard them.
 
I believe that St. Peter did write 2 Peter and Catholics can not just throw out his words because some “Scripture scholor” or some one posting in a forum says they are not his words.

Also, 2 Peter 3 is in the cannon of Sacred Scripture and if you hold the belief that there was not a World Wide Flood, Sacred Scripture and St. Peter is calling you a “decietful scoffer” and “ignorant”. These are strong words and Catholics can not take them lightly and just disregard them.
2Peter 3:3-6- Focus is on the Coming of the Lord

"This is now, beloved, the second letter I am writing to you; in them I am trying to arouse your sincere intention by reminding you 2that you should remember the words spoken in the past by the holy prophets, and the commandment of the Lord and Saviour spoken through your apostles. 3First of all you must understand this, that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and indulging their own lusts 4and saying, ‘Where is the promise of his coming? For ever since our ancestors died,* all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation!’ 5They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God heavens existed long ago and an earth was formed out of water and by means of water, 6through which the world of that time was deluged with water and perished. 7But by the same word the present heavens and earth have been reserved for fire, being kept until the day of judgement and destruction of the godless.
8 But do not ignore this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like one day. 9The Lord is not slow about his promise, as some think of slowness, but is patient with you,* not wanting any to perish, but all to come to repentance. 10But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, and then the heavens will pass away with a loud noise, and the elements will be dissolved with fire, and the earth and everything that is done on it will be disclosed.*
11 Since all these things are to be dissolved in this way, what sort of people ought you to be in leading lives of holiness and godliness, 12waiting for and hastening* the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be set ablaze and dissolved, and the elements will melt with fire? 13But, in accordance with his promise, we wait for new heavens and a new earth, where righteousness is at home.
Final Exhortation and Doxology14 Therefore, beloved, while you are waiting for these things, strive to be found by him at peace, without spot or blemish; 15and regard the patience of our Lord as salvation. So also our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given to him, 16speaking of this as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own destruction, as they do the other scriptures. 17You therefore, beloved, since you are forewarned, beware that you are not carried away with the error of the lawless and lose your own stability. 18But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be the glory both now and to the day of eternity. Amen.* "
<<
The Magesterium is made up of scripture scholars. Benedict xvi is a scripture scholar. if everbody understood scripture the same way and always looked at in the same way through eternity then the Bible would not be discussed, we would have one translation and scripture would be frozen in time , for all time-with one meaning only,- dead and desiccated. Since it is a living and not a dead thing it should be discussed , reviewed, understood in the context of time and place so it will remain vital in our time and place.Discussion and debate means it’s alive and discussion and debate is how you keep it alive.
 
2Peter 3:3-6- Focus is on the Coming of the Lord
<<
The Magesterium is made up of scripture scholars. Benedict xvi is a scripture scholar. if everbody understood scripture the same way and always looked at in the same way through eternity then the Bible would not be discussed, we would have one translation and scripture would be frozen in time , for all time-with one meaning only,- dead and desiccated. Since it is a living and not a dead thing it should be discussed , reviewed, understood in the context of time and place so it will remain vital in our time and place.Discussion and debate means it’s alive and discussion and debate is how you keep it alive.
This is all well and good, but we also must recognize that our present “context of time” involves moderist heresey where so call “Scripture scholars” interpret Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition in light of modern secular theory, theories which are unproven and in some cases are proven false. The belief that there was never a world wide judement and a world wide flood is a modernist heresey that St. Peter warned us against. It is modernist heresey in that it uses modern unproven theroy to interpret Scripture even to the point of ignoring where Scripture interprets Scripture (2Peter interprets Genesis).

This is relevent to preparation for the coming of Christ because modernist heresey and the acceptance of secular unproven theory above the Word of God has pulled many out of the Church and away from the Kingdom of God.

As St Peter warns, do not be decieved. Secular Humanism and “scientific theory” have become the authoritative religion of our culture and time.
 
This is all well and good, but we also must recognize that our present “context of time” involves moderist heresey where so call “Scripture scholars” interpret Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition in light of modern secular theory, theories which are unproven and in some cases are proven false. The belief that there was never a world wide judement and a world wide flood is a modernist heresey that St. Peter warned us against. It is modernist heresey in that it uses modern unproven theroy to interpret Scripture even to the point of ignoring where Scripture interprets Scripture (2Peter interprets Genesis).

This is relevent to preparation for the coming of Christ because modernist heresey and the acceptance of secular unproven theory above the Word of God has pulled many out of the Church and away from the Kingdom of God.

As St Peter warns, do not be decieved. Secular Humanism and “scientific theory” have become the authoritative religion of our culture and time.
That is not what Peter was warning us about.He was saying "Be ready"As people of the past thought everything was going like it always did then-boom -came the flood.Same thing with the Parousia.It will come like a thief in the night-if you don’t prepare now.

Not everything modern is a heresy as not everything in the past was pristine.Scripture scholarship has grown.The church has utilized those biblical scholars and has trained them.If you read Divino Spiritu Afflante Pius XII has a very positive twist on biblical scholarship.In the fifty years prior to the encyclical much had been learned in archaeology,philology -knowledge that had not be available in the past.
The Libraries at Mari and Ebla gave the biblical scholars much to study-much to ponder.The Church has always had scholars biblical and otherwise.We have one now in Benedict.
 
  1. The Catholic Church does not require Catholic to believe that 2 Peter was written by Peter himself. In fact, most Catholic Scripture scholars claim it was the last book in the NT canon written, i.e. long after Peter was martyred in Rome.
It is factually false to say that most Catholic Scripture scholars believe 2 Peter was the last book written. Opinions vary widely among scholars as to the dating and chronological order of the books of the NT.

The book 2 Peter explicitly states that the letter is from Simon Peter. The Church teaches in inerrancy of Scripture. Everything asserted by Scripture is asserted by the Holy Spirit.

The Council of Florence and the Council of Trent infallibly taught the Canon of Scripture. In doing so, they referred to the letters of Peter as “two letters of Peter”, “two of Peter the apostle”.

No matter who wrote which books of the Bible, all were written by the Holy Spirit, who cannot err, who cannot lie.
  1. The Catholic Church does not require Catholics to believe the historical fact of a worldwide deluge or flood.
This is true, but neither are we required to believe that a Flood did not occur.

The interpretation of the Noah story need not be either entirely literal or entirely figurative. My view is that the story contains both literal (historical) elements and figurative elements. We need not consider the world to be only a few thousand years old in order to believe that a major flood occurred worldwide at about the point in time indicated by Scripture.

In my opinion:
The fact of the flood is literal.
The extent of the flood is a figure, indicating the extent of sin and of salvation from sin.

The cause of the flood may be just as W. Bruce Masse postulates, which is a comet (or asteroid) impact in the Indian Ocean in the year 2807 B.C. The impact threw huge amounts of water into the upper atmosphere, which soon after fell as rain worldwide. Masse and other scientists have found evidence of this impact.

The time he gives for the flood fits the general time frame given by Scripture for the Flood. For example, if one counts the generations from Noah to Christ, and divides by the length of time (giving Masse’s date) the length of an average generation is a reasonable length. Whereas, if one does the same for the ‘Black Sea flood theory’ (5600 BC), about 2800 years earlier, the length of each generation is absurdly long.

The animals on the ark, in my view, were only a small proportion of the animals on earth, and these were on the ark as a symoblic representation of all life on earth. We need not literally believe that all the animals on earth were on the ark. Again, the fact of animals on the ark is literal; the extent is figurative.

We need not believe that every person on earth, other than in the ark, was killed. The fact that many were killed and that all on the ark were saved is literal. The extent of the killing was figurative, indicating the very many who lose salvation by not entering the Church.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top