Noah and the Flood is a Legend?

[Journeyman]

I have been looking over the textbook that that our parish uses for midde school religious education. The subject matter is the Old Testament. The book calls the story of Noah a legend, in that it started out as a real story but the story has been exaggerated to stress the truth that it teaches.

The text explains that Noah was supposedly able to build a boat to save his family and some animals that he raised, such as sheep, from a flood. As time went by, the story was exaggerated so that the flood covered the earth and Noah took two of every animal. The text further states that when we are reading the Bible and come across a story that seems unbelievable, chances are the story was never intended to be believed in the first place.

The text also states that the story of Adam and Eve is the most famous “myth” in the bible, and that the story seeks to explain the evil and suffering humanity now faces.

What is the official Catholic Church teaching on these “stories”? The text was written in 1994 and is published by Crossroads.

 

[buffalo]

A couple of links to explore:

Noah’s Ark Search

Arcimaging

How will they explain how it got so high up the mountain?

 

[GoodME]

I believe that the story of Noah foretells Baptism. By flooding the earth and cleansing it of the un-pure, God is teaching us what Baptism does for the believer. Death to sin; new life in Christ.

Having said this, I can imagine a story about a very serious flood or natural disaster that may have been passsed through the ages that was used as a model to tell the story. This is the source for a lot of the more literary passages and stories.

I think the important thing is to not get hung up in the details of the story, checking for facts (if we find a boat, how many cubits long should it be?). The importance is to realize the lesson it tuaght, and the fact that the lesson was unclear to man until Jesus came to explain it to us.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

What is the official Catholic Church teaching on these “stories”? The text was written in 1994 and is published by Crossroads.

Decision of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, 23 June 1905:
“It is not lawful to question the historical character of books hitherto regarded as historical, unless in a case where the sense of the Church is not opposed and where, subject to her judgment, it is proved by solid arguments that the sacred writer did not intend to write history” (1909 Catholic Encyclopedia - Pontifical Bible Commission, newadvent.org/cathen/02557a.htm).

Providentissimus Deus
Leo XIII (1893)
vatican.va/holy_father/leo_xiii/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_18111893_providentissimus-deus_en.html

---

***Divino Afflanate Spiritu ***
Piux XII (1943)
vatican.va/holy_father/pius_xii/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-xii_enc_30091943_divino-afflante-spiritu_en.html

**Dei Verbum
Paul VI (1965)
vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html
**
The Interpretation of the Bible in the Church
Pontifical Bible Commission, March 18, 1994
ewtn.com/library/CURIA/PBCINTER.HTM

---

 

[SMHW]

Did the book use the term ‘legend’ or did it use the term ‘myth’ as you said was used for Adam and Eve. The answer is important.

A ‘myth’ is a literary form (like a poem) and doesn’t mean that the story wasn’t true.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Pope Benedict XV, ***Spiritus Paraclitus ***(1920):

we ought not to desert the path mapped out by Christ and His Apostles, who, while regarding the Old Testament as preparing for and foreshadowing the New Covenant, and whilst consequently explaining various passages in the former as figurative, yet do not give a figurative interpretation of all alike. In confirmation of this … St. Paul, who, when “explaining the mystery of Adam and Eve, did not deny that they were formed, but on that historical basis erected a spiritual interpretation, and said: ‘Therefore shall a man leave,’ etc.”

 

[Veronica_Anne]

The Catholic Church proclaims and teaches that the biblical account of Noah and the Flood are true.

There actually WAS a flood of that proportion… and there actually WAS a man by the name of Noah who built that ark, put his family and those animals on it, and the flood came wiping away every living thing that existed until the flood that was not already on Noah’s ark.

Whatever “textbook” you’re talking about, no matter who publishes it, is in error when it says otherwise.

P.S. I agree with the person who pointed out the difference between “legend” and “myth.” Myth IS a literary form, like a poem.

Not to be confused with a fable (like Aesop’s fables).

 

[GuibertOfNogent]

I’ve always been baffled by the logistics of it all. Of course, miracles are possible, so one can’t place the story in the category of “parable” for that reason alone.

None the less, if you had two of EVERY ANIMAL in the world on a boat, how much would the food required to feed those animals for 40 days weigh? What about all the carnivores - were extra animals brought on board to feed them? How were all the plants kept fresh for all the herbivores? What did the ant-eaters eat? How did Noah gather all the zillion types of different foods required? How far did he have to travel to get 40 days worth of bamboo for the panda bears?

As anyone who takes care of animals knows - it can be time consuming. Taking care of a horse isn’t something to sneeze at - much less taking care of oxen, buffalos, bison, camels, zebras, etc. all at the same time.

Can you imagine how back-breaking the work was to feed all those animals and then do the pooper-scooping? Noah’s family must have had aching backs … first the elephant stalls, then the giraffe stalls, then the rhino stalls, then the hippo stalls, then the badger stalls, then the polar bear stalls, then the eagle stalls… phew. I’m getting tired just THINKING about all that shoveling…

 

[Journeyman]

SMHW:

Did the book use the term ‘legend’ or did it use the term ‘myth’ as you said was used for Adam and Eve. The answer is important.

A ‘myth’ is a literary form (like a poem) and doesn’t mean that the story wasn’t true.

The book defines a myth as giving “us a profound truth by means of what is often a “made-up” story with symbols everyone can understand”. It then calls the story of the Fall of Adam and Eve a “myth”.

The book defines legend “as a real event in history, but the storyteller adds exaggerated or imagined details to it to stress the truth it teaches”. Then it calls the story of Noah and the flood a “legend”. Sort of like the “Legend of Paul Bunyan”! As I noted in the original post, the book says that Noah might have saved his family and a few animals in a flood, but then the tale grew to a world-wide flood and a huge ark, etc…

 

[Faustina]

I do know that the flood story is not unique to the Old Testament.
There are many cultures out there who all have a story of massive flood. If some many cultures have written about the same story, then I would say it happened.

 

[GuibertOfNogent]

Faustina:

I do know that the flood story is not unique to the Old Testament.
There are many cultures out there who all have a story of massive flood. If some many cultures have written about the same story, then I would say it happened.

A huge number of cultures have stories about the earth being shaped out of a dead creature - whether it be a giant or otherwise. That doesn’t make it true.

Nearly 100% of all cultures have stories about “tiny” people - whether you call them brownies, faeries, elves, gnomes, etc. Does that mean there really are faeries?

Just about every culture in the world has worshipped a fertility goddess at some point - does that mean a fertility goddess exists?

I’m not saying that the flood didn’t happen, but other flood stories don’t prove anything. Many who attack the Bible point to those other flood stories as proof that the Bible is derivative, since those stories (Gilgamesh, for instance) predate the recording of the Old Testament. Either way, multiple flood stories don’t really prove anything, just as multiple “fairy” stories don’t prove anything. Most cultures are visited by UFOs and sky-beings, too…

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Journeyman,

I would consider ditching that textbook or else at least supplementing it with other more conservative Biblical scholarship, such as that from Fr. William Most.

See Fr. Most’s *Commentary on Genesis, *here:
catholicculture.org/docs/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=81

He states:

Before reading any book of the Bible the first move is to try to determine the literary genre. A genre is a pattern of writing such that the writer asserts some things, not others. In a modern historical novel, he asserts the main line is history, does not assert that the fictional fill-ins are historical.

Vatican II, in Dei verbum §11 told us that everything that is asserted by the human writer, is asserted by the Holy Spirit, who is the chief Author of all parts of Scripture.

This information makes it possible to answer countless charges of error and contradiction: *not everything is asserted. *E.g. the narrative parts of Daniel - are they historical, or rather the genre of edifying narrative? If the latter then the writer did not assert everything really happened: a story of this kind serves as a lift - much the same as science fiction is to real science. Again, was Jonah meant as strict history or as a sort of parable? And the stories of the patriarchs – many today think the genre is epic, i.e. the story of the beginnings of a great people, which still allows for considerable freedom or embroidery as it were (as we gather from epics of other nations). And the infancy narratives: how are they meant?

Very similar is the question of theologoumena (the singular is -on), e.g., when Scripture speaks of the virginal conception: is it meant as straight fact, or is it just a way of expressing her holiness? **It is obvious that what we have just said can be used well or badly. It can be used to solve problems. But it can also raise countless doubts. **Early in the 20th century the Modernists used this sort of means to reinterpret almost everything in Scripture. No wonder them St. Pius X called it the “synthesis of all heresies.”

… the decree [of the Pontifical Bible Commission] does not forbid at all … the approach through literary genres. No, it insists on two things: our decision must be guided by the Church - and there must be solid reasons for our view.

Pius XII told us … there are very few passages of Scripture for which the Church has explicitly declared the sense. That did not call for forgetting what is obvious: even if the Church has not pronounced explicitly on a text, we must see that any proposed interpretation fits with the whole of Church teachings. If it does not, we must drop it.

to be continued …

 

[itsjustdave1988]

continued from Fr. Most’s commentary…

… So - what is the genre of the creation stories? John Paul II in an audience of Sept 29, 1979 said: “The whole archaic form of the narrative manifests its primitive mythical character.” Then he explained further in an audience of Nov 7, 1979: “The term myth does not designate a fabulous content, but merely an archaic way of expressing a deeper content. In note 1 he cited at length Paul Ricoeur. The Pope also said on Sept 12, 1979: “… the first account of man’s creation is chronologically later than the second. The origin of this layer is much more remote. The more ancient text is defined as ‘Yahwist’…” Pope John Paul II in his Audience of November 7, 1979 said putting Adam to sleep could stand for a return to the moment before creation, so that man might reemerge in his double unity as male and female.”
We note two things the Pope said: 1) The genre of the creation stories is myth; but he explained it is not just a fable. He meant it was using an ancient story to bring out some things that really happened. 2) He spoke of the second creation account of man as Yahwist, thereby accepting the JEPD Documentary theory. - These conferences were part of a public series of audiences, but were not published in the Acta Apostolicae Sedis: His Conferences on Genesis were published as Original Unity of Man and Woman, Catechesis on the Book of Genesis, Boston, St. Paul Editions, 1981). Hence he did not mean to impose their contents on the whole Church.

… Pius XII … said “they pertain to history” in a way needing more study.

Now this is easily done. We say that through the medium of a story the writer teaches many things that really happened, and so were historical. The chief things were: God created all things. In some special way (note the room for theistic evolution) He made the first human pair. He gave them some sort of command - we do not know just what it was. They violated His order, fell from favor.

 

[PhilVaz]

I’ll add to this thread. No respectable geologist today believes there was a worldwide flood a few thousand years ago that covered the earth and is responsible for all the fossils we see deposited today. Only young earth creationists geologists believe that (such as the ICR’s Steve Austin).

Something like a worldwide flood can be tested scientifically, and it has been found wanting. I tend to go with a local flood for this reason. Hugh Ross (old earth creationist), Glenn Morton (former young-earther, now theistic evolutionist), Keith Miller (evangelical geologist), Ken Miller (Catholic biologist) and many others (Fr. Stanley Jaki, etc) deal with these kinds of subjects in much depth.

Noah may have lived, but his “world” was the world around where he lived. There was no reason to flood (for example) Antarctica where no folks survive even today.

See Problems with a Global Flood from TalkOrigins

This is an issue I’ve been studying recently, plus when to date Adam/Eve – between 4000-10000 BC (typical young-earther), between 60000-70000 BC (Hugh Ross), around 1-2 million years ago (Glenn Morton), etc. There are many opinions on that one as I’ve been learning.

An excellent scientific Christian organization presenting many sides

Phil P

 

[Ghosty]

There was a flood, and it likely covered much, if not all, of the habitable land of the Middle East, but there is no way a boat as literally described in the Genesis could literally have held two of every kind of creature on Earth. The dimensions of the boat are given, after all.

The story is definately true, but it must be read with the proper understanding of literary methods of the day. Literal writing and reading was not considered necessary for rendering the truth of the subject, or even the facts; often times literal reading of such ancient passages creates a completely false account of what occured.

 

[BayCityRickL]

The previous posts weigh in on many of the relevent issues.

Fr. Benedict Groeschel of EWTN made his position clear, that “he wasn’t there” so he’s not going to call it a myth.

The “myth” ideas about scripture go back a couple hundred years and originate outside the Catholic Church.

As important as the Pontifical Biblical Commission may be, it is not the magisterium of the Church. The PBC changes its mind on things, sometimes reversing itself completely. So, be advised.

For me, personally, I laugh at all the talk about “genre.” The Bible is unique in being considered inspired by God. I don’t think that there’s any other primitive documents out there that fall into that genre.

On the other hand, debates about the flood overlook the more questionable/interesting aspects of Genesis. How could the writer describe creation, if people were not created until day six?

Let’s let it all hang out here, too. The late Fr. Raymond E. Brown was convinced that the infancy narratives are fiction, simple composites of the fulfillment of scriptural predictions.

He was especially fond of the late Rudolf Bultmann (d. 1976) who says that the gospel writers put a lot of sayings into the mouth of Jesus. That is their partial explanation of the “problem” of the synoptic gospels – they don’t agree! Sometimes the parables are explained in different ways.

An interesting result was reported a couple years ago about an analysis of the crust of the earth. There is an incredible amount of groundwater in the crust, several times the amount of surface water. This analysis is reliable. So, don’t say there isn’t enough water on earth to flood it.

Climatologists think that the earth has undergone rapid climate changes in the past, and has gone through snowball periods. It takes a lot of water to make the ultimate snowball.

Brown says it’s up to us to prove that there was an ark or that Jesus fed 5,000 people, not the other way around. Build a church on that skepticism.

 

[tuopaolo]

The PBC used to be an arm of the papal magisterium but it is no longer so. I don’t remember its status was changed.

 

[Catholic2003]

The Pontifical Biblical Commission is a very important part of the Vatican curia, and is most certainly a part of the papal magisterium. Here is what the Apostolic Constitution Pastor Bonus by Pope John Paul II has to say about the status of the PBC (see article 55):

Art. 48 — The proper duty of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith is to promote and safeguard the doctrine on faith and morals in the whole Catholic world; so it has competence in things that touch this matter in any way.

Art. 49 — Fulfilling its duty of promoting doctrine, the Congregation fosters studies so that the understanding of the faith may grow and a response in the light of the faith may be given to new questions arising from the progress of the sciences or human culture.

Art. 50 — It helps the bishops, individually or in groups, in carrying out their office as authentic teachers and doctors of the faith, an office that carries with it the duty of promoting and guarding the integrity of that faith.

Art. 51 — To safeguard the truth of faith and the integrity of morals, the Congregation takes care lest faith or morals suffer harm through errors that have been spread in any way whatever.

Wherefore:

1. it has the duty of requiring that books and other writings touching faith or morals, being published by the Christian faithful, be subjected to prior examination by the competent authority;

1. it examines carefully writings and opinions that seem to be contrary or dangerous to true faith, and, if it is established that they are opposed to the teaching of the Church, reproves them in due time, having given authors full opportunity to explain their minds, and having forewarned the Ordinary concerned; it brings suitable remedies to bear, if this be opportune.

1. finally, it takes good care lest errors or dangerous doctrines, which may have been spread among the Christian people, do not go without apt rebuttal.

Art. 52 — The Congregation examines offences against the faith and more serious ones both in behaviour or in the celebration of the sacraments which have been reported to it and, if need be, proceeds to the declaration or imposition of canonical sanctions in accordance with the norms of common or proper law.

Art. 53 — It is to examine whatever concerns the privilege of the faith, both in law and in fact.

Art. 54 — Documents being published by other dicasteries of the Roman Curia, insofar as they touch on the doctrine of faith or morals, are to be subjected to its prior judgement.

Art. 55 — Established within the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith are the Pontifical Biblical Commission and the International Theological Commission, which act according to their own approved norms and are presided over by the cardinal prefect of this Congregation.

 

[jiml8966]

When the “world” is referred to in the story, I dont think they meant the WHOLE world. After all, the people back that far only new of the world as being their little part of the planet.

Getting two of every different animal probably wasnt as difficult as we think (Pandas are indigenious to China so I dont think Noah went to China to get two). Maybe he only took two of everything that was in his area of the world. Our scientific knowledge of biology is so much more advanced, maybe they didnt know about most of the animals that were around (burrowing animals, nocturnal animals etc) , again limiting the number of animals he needed to get on the ark.

Just some thoughts.

 

[SojournerOf78]

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

2 Peter 3:3-7