Fundamentalism and the Bible

[FightingFat]

Its sad to see 73% of people who voted it a “epic story”.

Its madness, complete madness to think this. And to try to explan it away by using “raining cats and dogs”.

Like jobeyjobey said, Jesus refers to this historical and biblical event.

St.Peter said this concerning Jesus-
2 Peter 1:16
We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

The flood myth was told because it had a purpose for the people of Israel. That story was as relevant in Jesus’ time as it was then and is today. I don’t see how Jesus refering to that story makes it more or less historically factual or that it really matters that much. As I posted earlier I do think that these myths have a basis in historical events, and I am open to the possibility of them being real things that happened.

 

[inthecloud]

I have seen Jewish sources calling the Noah’s flood regional but with universal consequences for men. They even say a literal reading of the Bible allows that.
That is similar that some Jesuit priest told me. The flood came from Mesopotamic oral traditions. It might be based in some real stories transmited by mouth for centuries and most likely deformed to convey a universal moral meaning.

 

[juliamajor]

The geological evidence precludes a conclusion that there was a world-wide flood at any time in earth’s history. There may have been a fairly catastrophic flood that was localized however. You must distinguish between literal and literalism. Literal means that we attempt the discern the writer’s actual meaning and purpose in what he wrote. Literalism is a belief that every story every fact stated in the bible is actually true, and that everything is written directed by God. Catholics do not believe in this fundamentalist approach to scripture. There is much in Genesis for instance that is simply not true factually. Recent popes have agreed.

And to anyone experiencing such a horrific event would see it as end of THEIR world. most people didn’t travel very far from their villages( their universe) so their experience on world events would be limited.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

And to anyone experiencing such a horrific event would see it as end of THEIR world. most people didn’t travel very far from their villages( their universe) so their experience on world events would be limited.

Absolutely right Julia. I know I just read something briefly that there was some ongoing anthropological work going on near the Black Sea. Seems that there may have been a rather major breach there and a major flooding of a very very large region, I presume to the south. I can’t remember much else, as to when, or where exactly. But I think your statement was right on.

 

[NDBouchard]

Hey guys, on a recent thread I was really suprised to see the majority of people posting believed that the Noah’s Ark story was a factual account. I’m not in any way being disrespectful to those who choose to believe in a fundamentalist interpretation of the Bible, but I am very interested in how many posters here take that line and why you feel like that!

Thanks in advance!

Hello Brother,
Sure, I believe that it probably was true. We know that there was a flood of epic porportions. There is some other scientific/cultural evidence that corroborates the “story” as well. Perhaps it wasn’t exactly as we picture it in the Bible… I like this faith filled response from from EWTN:

Answer by Fr. John Echert on 06-26-2002:
Though it has been popular in some circles to doubt the historicity of the account of the Flood in the time of Noah, I personally accept this as an historical reality. One argument which has been attempted against its historicity has been that there are ancient accounts of floods to be found among other peoples; however, rather than discounting the reality of the Flood I view this as corroborative. In other words, the presence of multiple accounts of some incredible flood in ancient times would argue in favor of such an occurrence, rather than assume they all borrow upon each other.
One thing I look to in affirming the historical existence of figures of the ancient past is to look to the New Testament wherein many of the ancient figures and episodes are affirmed by Jesus and various sacred writers. This, in itself, lends great credibility to the historicity of the matter. For instance, regarding Noah, I note eight references in the NT, such as follows:

Matt 24:37 As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of man. Matt 24:38 marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the Luke 3:36 Noah, the son of Lamech, Luke 17:26 As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Luke 17:27 the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, 1Pet 3:20 Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight 2Pet 2:5 if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of If Jesus believed in Noah and the ark, that is good enough for me.

As to whether or not we must affirm that the flood encompassed the entire orb of the earth, the text would seem to teach this and subsequent texts would tend to corroborate this, but there is some flexibility with regards to the first eleven chapters of the Book of Genesis, as expressed in the encyclical “Humani Generis” of Pope Pius XII:

“…the first eleven chapter of Genesis…nevertheless come under the heading of history; in what exact sense, it is for the further study of the exegete to determine. These chapters have a naïve, symbolic way of speaking, well suited to the understanding of primitive people. But they do disclose to us certain important truths, upon which the attainment of our eternal salvation depends, and they do also give a popular description of the origin of the human race and of the chosen people. It may be true that the ancient authors of sacred history drew some of their material from current popular stories. So much may be granted. But it must be remembered that they did so under the impulse of divine inspiration which preserved them from all error in selecting and assessing the material they used….“these excerpts from current stories, which are found in the sacred books, must not be put on a level with mere myths, or with legend in general…In the OT a love of truth and a cult of simplicity shine out in such a way as to put these writers on a distinctly different level from their profane contemporaries.”

Even while acknowledging some latitude in these early chapters, it appears that science is increasingly able to corroborate what we have held in faith based upon biblical texts, including bases for such matters as an ancient deluge, genetic linking back to one mother and possible on father, and the possibility of extended life-spans prior to the deluge. ©

Thanks, Chris

Father Echert

 

[FightingFat]

Wow! This has been an excellent discussion, and much more productive than I anticipated I have to say! Thanks you all very much!!!

 

[inthecloud]

Quote:

Originally Posted by juliamajor
And to anyone experiencing such a horrific event would see it as end of THEIR world. most people didn’t travel very far from their villages( their universe) so their experience on world events would be limited.

Absolutely right Julia. I know I just read something briefly that there was some ongoing anthropological work going on near the Black Sea. Seems that there may have been a rather major breach there and a major flooding of a very very large region, I presume to the south. I can’t remember much else, as to when, or where exactly. But I think your statement was right on.

You both are right, for the ancients, a mayor regional flood would have been a universal food.
So there is a historical basis for the Noah story, that is the reason why the Church never had condemed as a error a literal or symbolic reading of Noah.

 

[Michael_G]

The geological evidence precludes a conclusion that there was a world-wide flood at any time in earth’s history. There may have been a fairly catastrophic flood that was localized however. You must distinguish between literal and literalism. Literal means that we attempt the discern the writer’s actual meaning and purpose in what he wrote. Literalism is a belief that every story every fact stated in the bible is actually true, and that everything is written directed by God. Catholics do not believe in this fundamentalist approach to scripture. There is much in Genesis for instance that is simply not true factually. Recent popes have agreed.

Really how is it we have fossilized fish burial grounds on top of some the highest mountain peaks in the world. Fossils do not fossilize by a gradual buriel over eons of time, they decay. Fossils are generally perserved throughtout the world because they were buriend rapidly with multiple layers caused in all likelyhood by a flood. a miniture replica of what could occur by a world wide flood can be made by studied how a complete 100 ft deep canyon was carved out in a few days when mt st helens blew its gasket back in 1980.

 

[Michael_G]

Hello Brother,
Sure, I believe that it probably was true. We know that there was a flood of epic porportions. There is some other scientific/cultural evidence that corroborates the “story” as well. Perhaps it wasn’t exactly as we picture it in the Bible… I like this faith filled response from from EWTN:

Answer by Fr. John Echert on 06-26-2002:
Though it has been popular in some circles to doubt the historicity of the account of the Flood in the time of Noah, I personally accept this as an historical reality. One argument which has been attempted against its historicity has been that there are ancient accounts of floods to be found among other peoples; however, rather than discounting the reality of the Flood I view this as corroborative. In other words, the presence of multiple accounts of some incredible flood in ancient times would argue in favor of such an occurrence, rather than assume they all borrow upon each other.
One thing I look to in affirming the historical existence of figures of the ancient past is to look to the New Testament wherein many of the ancient figures and episodes are affirmed by Jesus and various sacred writers. This, in itself, lends great credibility to the historicity of the matter. For instance, regarding Noah, I note eight references in the NT, such as follows:

Matt 24:37 As were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of man. Matt 24:38 marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the Luke 3:36 Noah, the son of Lamech, Luke 17:26 As it was in the days of Noah, so will it be in the days of the Son of Luke 17:27 the day when Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, 1Pet 3:20 Noah, during the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight 2Pet 2:5 if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of If Jesus believed in Noah and the ark, that is good enough for me.

As to whether or not we must affirm that the flood encompassed the entire orb of the earth, the text would seem to teach this and subsequent texts would tend to corroborate this, but there is some flexibility with regards to the first eleven chapters of the Book of Genesis, as expressed in the encyclical “Humani Generis” of Pope Pius XII:

“…the first eleven chapter of Genesis…nevertheless come under the heading of history; in what exact sense, it is for the further study of the exegete to determine. These chapters have a naïve, symbolic way of speaking, well suited to the understanding of primitive people. But they do disclose to us certain important truths, upon which the attainment of our eternal salvation depends, and they do also give a popular description of the origin of the human race and of the chosen people. It may be true that the ancient authors of sacred history drew some of their material from current popular stories. So much may be granted. But it must be remembered that they did so under the impulse of divine inspiration which preserved them from all error in selecting and assessing the material they used….“these excerpts from current stories, which are found in the sacred books, must not be put on a level with mere myths, or with legend in general…In the OT a love of truth and a cult of simplicity shine out in such a way as to put these writers on a distinctly different level from their profane contemporaries.”

Even while acknowledging some latitude in these early chapters, it appears that science is increasingly able to corroborate what we have held in faith based upon biblical texts, including bases for such matters as an ancient deluge, genetic linking back to one mother and possible on father, and the possibility of extended life-spans prior to the deluge. ©

Thanks, Chris

Father Echert

Exactly. These so called scholars that people want to rely on that declare Noahs flood as a make believe story, are the same scholars who are stating that Mathew never wrote the gospel of Mathew, that John the evangelist is not the author of John, we see this in the New American Bible, nothing but hogwash it is, they are out to destroy the credibility of the written word and centuries of 1,900 years of Catholic teaching. Turn the church into mush and you get mush.back.

 

[PaperMoon]

Exactly. These so called scholars that people want to rely on that declare Noahs flood as a make believe story, are the same scholars who are stating that Mathew never wrote the gospel of Mathew, that John the evangelist is not the author of John, we see this in the New American Bible, nothing but hogwash it is, they are out to destroy the credibility of the written word and centuries of 1,900 years of Catholic teaching. Turn the church into mush and you get mush.back.

I agree, I believe the Bible says what it means and means what it says. People forget that those who wrote the Bible were let by God so even if THEY thought the flood was worldwide from their point of view and it wasn’t then God would have inspired them to say they think or believe it was worldwide, but the Bible specifically said that the purpose of the flood was to destroy ALL of mankind off the earth except for Noah and his family. Period. That’s what it says, and that’s what it means. Once a person starts to question certain parts of the Bible as being true or only symbolic it leads to questioning everything in the Bible. I believe the Bible means what it says and says what it means. Now areas where the Bible is silent people can fill in with what they think because the Bible doesn’t specifiacally say one thing or another, but the Bible specifically says the whole earth was covered, so that’s what I believe.

 

[FightingFat]

I don’t think that’s the purpose of the flood story at all. I think that it is a theology, it stands against the epic of Gilgamesh and the other flood stories. It is Israel’s flood story-- the differences between this story and the others are essential in theological terms, hope, renewal, a God who loves us.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Really how is it we have fossilized fish burial grounds on top of some the highest mountain peaks in the world. Fossils do not fossilize by a gradual buriel over eons of time, they decay. Fossils are generally perserved throughtout the world because they were buriend rapidly with multiple layers caused in all likelyhood by a flood. a miniture replica of what could occur by a world wide flood can be made by studied how a complete 100 ft deep canyon was carved out in a few days when mt st helens blew its gasket back in 1980.

Oh there are plenty of reason for that. I invite you to my blog down the right column, look for the science section and links to 2 geological societies and the smithsonian who can explain this all better than I. What you refer to is what is today mountains was yesterdays flatlands. Also, there were localized floods in various parts of the globe over the eons. Additionally, I’m told there is simply insufficient water to cover the entire globe to a depth required. You can find as I say, the full explanation at the sites I provide. Plate techtonics have a great deal to do with this as well I’m told.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Exactly. These so called scholars that people want to rely on that declare Noahs flood as a make believe story, are the same scholars who are stating that Mathew never wrote the gospel of Mathew, that John the evangelist is not the author of John, we see this in the New American Bible, nothing but hogwash it is, they are out to destroy the credibility of the written word and centuries of 1,900 years of Catholic teaching. Turn the church into mush and you get mush.back.

I am not at all sure that they are the same people at all. I believe that those who tell us that no such worldwide flood could have occured are called scientists. The stuff about Matthew and John have nothing to do with this particular argument.

You are more than welcome to intrerpret the bible as fundamentalist non-Catholics do, however the Church does not require it, and in fact warns against such fundamentalism calling it “intellectual suicide”. The Church recognizes that these stories are very old myths that are used to convey important theological truths not science or history.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

I agree, I believe the Bible says what it means and means what it says. People forget that those who wrote the Bible were let by God so even if THEY thought the flood was worldwide from their point of view and it wasn’t then God would have inspired them to say they think or believe it was worldwide, but the Bible specifically said that the purpose of the flood was to destroy ALL of mankind off the earth except for Noah and his family. Period. That’s what it says, and that’s what it means. Once a person starts to question certain parts of the Bible as being true or only symbolic it leads to questioning everything in the Bible. I believe the Bible means what it says and says what it means. Now areas where the Bible is silent people can fill in with what they think because the Bible doesn’t specifiacally say one thing or another, but the Bible specifically says the whole earth was covered, so that’s what I believe.

As I said, the Church still allows this protestant interpretation but does warn Catholics of its dangers.

 

[PaperMoon]

let’s see you are willing to make words which say one thing mean something totaly different based on conjecture of some modernist scholars, the same scholars who deny that Mathew wrote the gospel of Mathew, that John the evanelist did not really write the gospel of John.

Now you have another problem with this conjecture in
Heb 11:4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, through which he had witness borne to him that he was righteous, God bearing witness in respect of his gifts: and through it he being dead yet speaketh. Heb 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and he was not found, because God translated him: for before his translation he hath had witness borne to him that he had been well–pleasing unto God: …Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God concerning things not seen as yet, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; through which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith. Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed to go out unto a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing whither he went. Heb 11:9 By faith he became a sojourner in the land of promise, as in a land not his own, dwelling in tents, with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: …

So if you say everything here in Hebrews is factual and not a myth except Noah, it does fit and is nonsensical, if you say all of the OT saints are myth, than the NT is based on myths an fables and you really have no truth that can realistically defended.

So by your instance that the modern day scholar conjectures based on outside sources from Scripture are right, you are in violation of all four rules of interpeting Scripture the very rules which have been ackowledge not to have been overruled or stated as wrong, for even the vatican and Popes have not declared your interpretation as official teaching of the church, conjecture does not make the literal interpretation of Noah unatenable.

I do believe that your position is no longer credible at all, without doing grave damage to all of Scripture

Very good post! Amen!

 

[TMC]

I don’t think that’s the purpose of the flood story at all. I think that it is a theology, it stands against the epic of Gilgamesh and the other flood stories. It is Israel’s flood story-- the differences between this story and the others are essential in theological terms, hope, renewal, a God who loves us.

I agree. One of the interesting things about relating the Genesis accounts to early myths from nearby societies is the differences in meaning and significance that the Genesis author gives to externally similar events. The differences between the religion of Abraham and his descendants and that of other early civilized people can be seen in these differences. Whether the similarities speak to evidence that the accounts depict actual events is much less interesting to me.

 

[PaperMoon]

I don’t think that’s the purpose of the flood story at all. I think that it is a theology, it stands against the epic of Gilgamesh and the other flood stories. It is Israel’s flood story-- the differences between this story and the others are essential in theological terms, hope, renewal, a God who loves us.

Exactly! A worldwide flood would be experienced by all cultures and many if not all cultures will have their own flood story because they all expereinced it. But not being Godly people, they would misinterpret the reason for it or even exactly why it happened etc. All they know is they all experienced a flood because God caused it to rain all over the whole earth. So each culture’s flood story may look slightly different according to how they understood or didn’t understand what was happeneing and why. The epic of gilgamesh is a perfect example.

 

[SpiritMeadow]

Exactly! A worldwide flood would be experienced by all cultures and many if not all cultures will have their own flood story because they all expereinced it. But not being Godly people, they would misinterpret the reason for it or even exactly why it happened etc. All they know is they all experienced a flood because God caused it to rain all over the whole earth. So each culture’s flood story may look slightly different according to how they understood or didn’t understand what was happeneing and why. The epic of gilgamesh is a perfect example.

Your argument is fine except for the fact that there was no worldwide flood. Now there may well have been local flooding as we have already talked about. That might well have appeared to ancient people as worldwide since they had no understanding of what the world consisted of. I agree that local writers of any epic flood story wrote that it was worldwide from their point of view.

PS. I understand that some use larger type for eyesight problems, but the pink is a bit hard to take.

 

[Michael_G]

I am not at all sure that they are the same people at all. I believe that those who tell us that no such worldwide flood could have occured are called scientists. The stuff about Matthew and John have nothing to do with this particular argument.
you have stated many times that you have learned that noah is just a story from catholic catechical classes, RCI, Catholic theologins in Catholic Universities, you are apparently contradicting yourself.

You are more than welcome to intrerpret the bible as fundamentalist non-Catholics do, however the Church does not require it, and in fact warns against such fundamentalism calling it “intellectual suicide”. The Church recognizes that these stories are very old myths that are used to convey important theological truths not science or history
Well are you going to call Etwn and Father John Echert fundamentalist, and committing intellectual suicide very interesting indeed. " By the way your position which supports noah as just a stroy and does not include the possiblity that Noah is a realy global flood just as it literaly states is really contray to Catholic Teaching. Since you hold one view as absolute, and the church leaves the question at least open, makes your position one of intellectual suicide. Answer by Fr. John Echert on 06-26-2002:
Though it has been popular in some circles to doubt the historicity of the account of the Flood in the time of Noah, I personally accept this as an historical reality. One argument which has been attempted against its historicity has been that there are ancient accounts of floods to be found among other peoples; however, rather than discounting the reality of the Flood I view this as corroborative. In other words, the presence of multiple accounts of some incredible flood in ancient times would argue in favor of such an occurrence, rather than assume they all borrow upon each other.
One thing I look to in affirming the historical existence of figures of the ancient past is to look to the New Testament wherein many of the ancient figures and episodes are affirmed by Jesus and various sacred writers. This, in itself, lends great credibility to the historicity of the matter. For instance, regarding Noah, I note eight references in the NT, such as follows:"

.

 

[Michael_G]

Oh there are plenty of reason for that. I invite you to my blog down the right column, look for the science section and links to 2 geological societies and the smithsonian who can explain this all better than I. What you refer to is what is today mountains was yesterdays flatlands. Also, there were localized floods in various parts of the globe over the eons. Additionally, I’m told there is simply insufficient water to cover the entire globe to a depth required. You can find as I say, the full explanation at the sites I provide. Plate techtonics have a great deal to do with this as well I’m told

.

number one the argument that fossils only occur by rapid buriel stands, the fact that multilayers can be layed down overnight and and in a matter of days such as from Mt St helens stands, fossils do not occur by gradual buriel over eons of times, this stands. The other info is debatable from a scientific perspective. Yes the mountain were probably flat at one time, what caused them rise up.

Here is what scripture tells us Gen Chap 7n that day all the fountains of the great deep burst forth, and the **windows of the heavens were opened.
**12: And rain fell upon the earth forty days and forty nights.

Water from underground burst forth, quite possibly so much water burst up from the ground as to radically change the landscape, raising up mountains, while other land droped to form equally deep vallies all in a matter of days. The windows of the heavens were opened (windows, multiple heavnes??)

Gen 1:1: In the beginning God created the heavens…6: And God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.”
7: And God made the** firmament and separated the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament.** And it was so. There are some who believe in essence their were two water layers above the earth, with a radically different one one layer of heavy midst, or possibly cloud cover and a water canopy which covered the entire globe. All this water from a bove and massive release of water bursting from underground causing land to rise and mountains to spring up, and major vallies to be created would equal a world wide flood which would not disapte until all the water ran off the high ground into the vallies i.e. Ocean vallies. Platonics now made present as portions of the earth break apart from the water springing forth from the depths of the earth. Radical climate changes overnight, Now I cannot prove this scenerio anymore than you can disprove it, I cannot disprove your theory anymore than you can prove it as absolute fact. So Noahs flood in book is stalemate, except that the NT confirm, and it then takes more proof to just toss it out the window.