B
buffalo
Guest
Jim Baur said:
**“All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.” **
- Status
**“All other senses of Sacred Scripture are based on the literal.” **
J
Jim_Baur
Guest
The Woodpecker Might have to go!
Everything I need to know about life, I learned fromNoah’sArkOne****: Don’t miss the boat.Two: Remember that we are all in the same boat.Three: Plan ahead. It wasn’t raining when Noah built the Ark.Four: Stay fit When you’re 600 years old, someone may ask you to do something really big.Five: Don’t listen to critics; just get on with the job that needs to be done.Six: Build your future on high ground.Seven: For safety’s sake, travel in pairs.Eight: Speed isn’t always an advantage. The snails were on board with the cheetahs. Nine: When you’re stressed, float a while.Ten: Remember, the Ark was built by amateurs; the Titanic by professionals.Eleven: No matter the storm, when you are with God, there’s always a rainbow waiting
Everything I need to know about life, I learned fromNoah’sArkOne****: Don’t miss the boat.Two: Remember that we are all in the same boat.Three: Plan ahead. It wasn’t raining when Noah built the Ark.Four: Stay fit When you’re 600 years old, someone may ask you to do something really big.Five: Don’t listen to critics; just get on with the job that needs to be done.Six: Build your future on high ground.Seven: For safety’s sake, travel in pairs.Eight: Speed isn’t always an advantage. The snails were on board with the cheetahs. Nine: When you’re stressed, float a while.Ten: Remember, the Ark was built by amateurs; the Titanic by professionals.Eleven: No matter the storm, when you are with God, there’s always a rainbow waiting
J
Jim_Baur
Guest
116 The literal sense is the meaning conveyed…
**What is the meaning? **
**What is the meaning? **
C
Christ4Life
Guest
Although I am not Catholic, I ask to be allowed to express my opinion…
I have mostly read all the posts, and I have realized that a major part of the argument against the actual occurence of the flood is due to the fact that it may not have been practical. But, so what? Who cares if it wasn’t practical? Do you think God cares? Is God limited by such trivial matters? Cannot God simply will, and it is. Do explanations have to exist for every single matter? We are not supposed to understand everything about God, in that case he would not be the “incomprehsible”.
In regards to the inspiration of the Bible and its accuracy, 2 Timothy 3: 16 clearly says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” If there was any space for the person writing Scripture to make any kind of mistake, Saint Paul would never say that it is profitable for reproof and correction, am I right?
Personally, I completely disagree with dismissing valuable lessons of the Bible as “myths” and merely symbolical. Adam and Eve did exist. The way that the New Testament echoes every verse of the Old proves to every Christian that the Old is not only symbolicaly but historically true.
As for a regional versus global flood, what does it matter? The point is, there was a flood. Is there something I’m missing?
I hope I haven’t offended anyone, and I hope to engage in a kind discussion.
I have mostly read all the posts, and I have realized that a major part of the argument against the actual occurence of the flood is due to the fact that it may not have been practical. But, so what? Who cares if it wasn’t practical? Do you think God cares? Is God limited by such trivial matters? Cannot God simply will, and it is. Do explanations have to exist for every single matter? We are not supposed to understand everything about God, in that case he would not be the “incomprehsible”.
In regards to the inspiration of the Bible and its accuracy, 2 Timothy 3: 16 clearly says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” If there was any space for the person writing Scripture to make any kind of mistake, Saint Paul would never say that it is profitable for reproof and correction, am I right?
Personally, I completely disagree with dismissing valuable lessons of the Bible as “myths” and merely symbolical. Adam and Eve did exist. The way that the New Testament echoes every verse of the Old proves to every Christian that the Old is not only symbolicaly but historically true.
As for a regional versus global flood, what does it matter? The point is, there was a flood. Is there something I’m missing?
I hope I haven’t offended anyone, and I hope to engage in a kind discussion.
J
juliamajor
Guest
Jesus and Peter were using the Flood as a metaphor for their teaching. Using a metaphor to prove something is weak indeed…If I say “it’s raining cats and dogs”- you know what I mean- there is no need to explain that phrase to someone who is familiar with the idiom. Jesus and Peter were people of their times using language that people would understand and relate to. I don’t think His point was to prove something or not- it was to teach.How do you skeptics deal with the fact that both Jesus and Peter assumed the story was literal? Do you think the second person of the Trinity and the Apostle who was the first pope were just unenlightened simpletons? Or is the New Testament record also not to be trusted?
As for me I will stick with Jesus and Peter on this one.
Mel
C
Christ4Life
Guest
Why does everything become a metaphor? Why can’t we simply believe things they way they are, without complicating the matter? How do you know that they only used them as metaphors? None of us witnessed their times (I hope). Assumptions do not lead us to the truth.
J
juliamajor
Guest
I could say the same thing- how do you know they were not metaphors?. The big mistake is taking Genesis as scientific history- it isn’t and to tell the truth that’s not a biggy within the OT.The point of Genesis is that it leads to the high point of the ancient Jewish experience- The Exodus. What’s important is the patriarchal narratives and how Israel became the 'Chosen" people through Abraham and his descendants.If the Creation, flood and tower of babel were so important then why are only 12 chapters out of 50? why do the patriarchal narratives warrant 38 chapters? what’s wrong with metaphors- last time I looked it wasn’t a dirty word. The books of the bible do not consist of one genre- but many. You can’t read it in one manner- but each must be taken as separate literary units. Song of Songs can’t be read in the same way as Job or Esther or Kings. Just as the Psalms are metaphoric(like good poetry is) doesn’t mean it isn’t true- and it doesn’t have weight. They idea that only narratives can be take seriously is a modern idea- that’s how we envision our world-linearly.
S
spauline
Guest
there is an extreme in Catholic thought that tends toward liberalism, to say, who really cares if ANY major OT history occurred in ANY sense? It could all be fairy tales meant to teach lessons only, and not history in any real sense.
That is seriously flawed thinking according to ancient Catholic Tradition. The Messiah could not enter into human history until man is ready to receive Him. Certain major Divine Interventions in human history were necessary in order to prepare humanity to receive their Messiah.
THe CCC seems to imply certain minimal developments and Covenants necessary to prepare for that Coming:
The Flood and Covenant with Noah
The Division of Nations [Babel] and Calling of Abraham
The Exodus and Giving of the Law
The Babylonian Captivity: Merciful Chastisement and the Prophets
Therefore, the Church would strongly disagree with an attempt to completely allegorize away the OT as nothing but pious parables meant to teach lessons only, with no real connection to anything historical.
That being said, when we return to the question of Noah and the Flood, the Church says all but dogmatically that in some sense, the Fall brought man into a condition of near total spiritual depravity, saving a remnant, and that God essentially obliterated all humanity, sparing the remnant, through a Flood.
Obviously, Genesis communicates this allegorically, but the Church all but expresses dogmatically that in some sense, this is history. It is just non-literal history.
That is seriously flawed thinking according to ancient Catholic Tradition. The Messiah could not enter into human history until man is ready to receive Him. Certain major Divine Interventions in human history were necessary in order to prepare humanity to receive their Messiah.
THe CCC seems to imply certain minimal developments and Covenants necessary to prepare for that Coming:
The Flood and Covenant with Noah
The Division of Nations [Babel] and Calling of Abraham
The Exodus and Giving of the Law
The Babylonian Captivity: Merciful Chastisement and the Prophets
Therefore, the Church would strongly disagree with an attempt to completely allegorize away the OT as nothing but pious parables meant to teach lessons only, with no real connection to anything historical.
That being said, when we return to the question of Noah and the Flood, the Church says all but dogmatically that in some sense, the Fall brought man into a condition of near total spiritual depravity, saving a remnant, and that God essentially obliterated all humanity, sparing the remnant, through a Flood.
Obviously, Genesis communicates this allegorically, but the Church all but expresses dogmatically that in some sense, this is history. It is just non-literal history.
C
Christ4Life
Guest
If you can say the same thing, what makes either one of us right?
I have history saying it did exist. What says it didn’t exist?
I fail to understand why some people are so sure the flood did not exist, although, as said before, it is easier to believe it did exist. If it did not exist, why then was it used by Christ and our Early Church Fathers to explain many pillars of the faith?
I have history saying it did exist. What says it didn’t exist?
I fail to understand why some people are so sure the flood did not exist, although, as said before, it is easier to believe it did exist. If it did not exist, why then was it used by Christ and our Early Church Fathers to explain many pillars of the faith?
J
juliamajor
Guest
See reply#105
C
Christ4Life
Guest
But what proves that they were using it as a metaphor? Nothing does. In fact, we have reason to believe it isn’t a metaphor. When Christ describes the times of Noah and compares it to his times, we have reason to believe that the Ark actually existed. It’s like saying life in some third world countries is like that of the French Revolution. Is that a metaphor? No, I mean it literally. So what makes Christ’s analogy any different?
J
juliamajor
Guest
That’s a really odd comparison- but oh well.Being men of their times and teaching folks of their time period they would understand history and science as people of their time period. Not the same as our understanding of it- it is very much non-linear- chronology not being very important. They were first century men do you really expect them to think act and rationalize as people of our century? Why would they? What are parables? Why do Jesus tell them. Because it’s in the Bible doesn’t make it literally true. Was the story of the wise and foolish virgins literally true? Lazarus and Dives?They’re metaphoric.There aren’t labels in the Bible that say"Warning- this story is NOT to be taken literally." Why people get hung up on the historicity of the extreme ancient past-no witnesses - or extrabiblical material available- is really beyond me.The message of the story of the creation, Adam and eve, Noah etc.and the importance of the stories gets lost in this pi**ing contest. It gets to be absurd and counterproductive.A better question would be “what does the story of Noah’s Ark mean and why is it important”?
D
dranzal
Guest
It is disturbing that some are insisting that certain stories in the OT are not historical. They are historical. They may not be written in the precise way historians write today. That doesn’t matter.
What I think doesn’t matter a hill 'o beans though.
What does the Church teach?
Here is a copy and paste from www.newadvent.org
The following are some of the New Testament passages which imply that the Deluge was a real historical event: “And as in the days of Noah, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, even till that day in which Noah entered into the ark, and they knew not. till the flood came, and took them all away; so also shall the coming of the Son of man be” (Matthew 24:37-39). In these words Christ regards the Flood with its circumstances as being not less real than the last days will be of which He speaks in the passage. The same view concerning the Flood, Christ implies in Luke, xvii, 26-27. In the Epistle to the Hebrews (xi, 7) the inspired writer is not less clear about the historicity of the Flood: “By faith, Noah having received an answer concerning those things which as yet were not seen, moved with fear, framed the ark for the saving of his house, by the which he condemned the world; and was instituted heir of the justice which is by faith.” St. Peter (1 Peter 3:20) too refers to the ark and the Flood as historical facts: “When they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noah, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water”. He returns to the same teaching in II Peter, ii, 5.
(b) As to the view of Christian tradition, it suffices to appeal here to the words of Father Zorell who maintains that the Bible story concerning the Flood has never been explained or understood in any but a truly historical sense by any Catholic writer (cf. Hagen, Lexicon Biblicum). It would be useless labour and would exceed the scope of the present article to enumerate the long list of Fathers and Scholastic theologians who have touched upon the question. The few stray discordant voices belonging to the last fifteen or twenty years are simply drowned in this unanimous chorus of Christian tradition.
(c) The historicity of the Biblical Flood account is confirmed by the tradition existing in all places and at all times as to the occurrence of a similar catastrophe. F. von Schwarz (Sintfluth und Völkerwanderungen, pp. 8-18) enumerates sixty-three such Flood stories which are in his opinion independent of the Biblical account. R. Andree (Die Flutsagen ethnographisch betrachtet) discusses eighty-eight different Flood stories, and considers sixty-two of them as independent of the Chaldee and Hebrew tradition. Moreover, these stories extend through all the races of the earth excepting the African; these are excepted, not because it is certain that they do not possess any Flood traditions, but because their traditions have not as yet been sufficiently investigated. Lenormant pronounces the Flood story as the most universal tradition in the history of primitive man, and Franz Delitzsch was of opinion that we might as well consider the history of Alexander the Great a myth, as to call the Flood tradition a fable.
The Church views the Old Testament (and the NT) as a story of the history of Salvation. The poetry and figurative language in some parts does not negate this. It is NOT just a book of nice, educational fairy tales.
What I think doesn’t matter a hill 'o beans though.
What does the Church teach?
Here is a copy and paste from www.newadvent.org
The following are some of the New Testament passages which imply that the Deluge was a real historical event: “And as in the days of Noah, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, even till that day in which Noah entered into the ark, and they knew not. till the flood came, and took them all away; so also shall the coming of the Son of man be” (Matthew 24:37-39). In these words Christ regards the Flood with its circumstances as being not less real than the last days will be of which He speaks in the passage. The same view concerning the Flood, Christ implies in Luke, xvii, 26-27. In the Epistle to the Hebrews (xi, 7) the inspired writer is not less clear about the historicity of the Flood: “By faith, Noah having received an answer concerning those things which as yet were not seen, moved with fear, framed the ark for the saving of his house, by the which he condemned the world; and was instituted heir of the justice which is by faith.” St. Peter (1 Peter 3:20) too refers to the ark and the Flood as historical facts: “When they waited for the patience of God in the days of Noah, when the ark was a building: wherein a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water”. He returns to the same teaching in II Peter, ii, 5.
(b) As to the view of Christian tradition, it suffices to appeal here to the words of Father Zorell who maintains that the Bible story concerning the Flood has never been explained or understood in any but a truly historical sense by any Catholic writer (cf. Hagen, Lexicon Biblicum). It would be useless labour and would exceed the scope of the present article to enumerate the long list of Fathers and Scholastic theologians who have touched upon the question. The few stray discordant voices belonging to the last fifteen or twenty years are simply drowned in this unanimous chorus of Christian tradition.
(c) The historicity of the Biblical Flood account is confirmed by the tradition existing in all places and at all times as to the occurrence of a similar catastrophe. F. von Schwarz (Sintfluth und Völkerwanderungen, pp. 8-18) enumerates sixty-three such Flood stories which are in his opinion independent of the Biblical account. R. Andree (Die Flutsagen ethnographisch betrachtet) discusses eighty-eight different Flood stories, and considers sixty-two of them as independent of the Chaldee and Hebrew tradition. Moreover, these stories extend through all the races of the earth excepting the African; these are excepted, not because it is certain that they do not possess any Flood traditions, but because their traditions have not as yet been sufficiently investigated. Lenormant pronounces the Flood story as the most universal tradition in the history of primitive man, and Franz Delitzsch was of opinion that we might as well consider the history of Alexander the Great a myth, as to call the Flood tradition a fable.
The Church views the Old Testament (and the NT) as a story of the history of Salvation. The poetry and figurative language in some parts does not negate this. It is NOT just a book of nice, educational fairy tales.
C
Christ4Life
Guest
I know the comparison is odd- I couldn’t think of anything better at the time. I actually think the fuss is being made by the people who insist it wasn’t true, for since the beginning of time people have believed it literally. See this.
grmi.org/Richard_Riss/evidences2/08ark.html
C
christcnection1
Guest
A worldwide flood is no more “miraculous” than the resurrection or the very fact life itself exists.
I understand that many ancient cultures throughout the earth have “legends” of a worldwide flood, and how mankind was saved through a Noah-like figure.
I am sure there is more solid information than the link provided below.
nwcreation.net/noahlegends.html
I do not advocate that it must have happened this way. But if it did, it’s not hard to believe relative to other extraordinary things in Christianity.
I understand that many ancient cultures throughout the earth have “legends” of a worldwide flood, and how mankind was saved through a Noah-like figure.
I am sure there is more solid information than the link provided below.
nwcreation.net/noahlegends.html
I do not advocate that it must have happened this way. But if it did, it’s not hard to believe relative to other extraordinary things in Christianity.
J
juliamajor
Guest
They also believed that the world was a concave bowl.Or that the world is flat( flat earthers are still out there). There are variations of “cinderella” story all over the world also. that doesn’t make it so.many of these stories are archetypes- universal tales that all mankind can relate to. See k12nj.us - k12nj Resources and Information. will load a powerpoint presentation.There are links you can follow. What bothers me is that some people take this as a test of orthodoxy and “Catholicity”.How you measure up as a christian. I went to Bible School run by my diiocese, in a very conservative Archdiocese- studied for four years- was certificated and now teach Adult Bible Study for over four years - have taught all kinds of people and only here is my faith questioned! The funny thing is that people I teach say that there faith has increased- not decreased by the method I use.If you put people in a fundamentalist straight jacket you have fundamentalist faith. Anti- intellectual, no thought, narrow, crude one dimensional view of God, Jesus, the HS and the Church.! I personally think that idea diminishes God’s greatness putting Him on our level! I have tried to be a bulwark against the encroachment of Fundamentalist interpretation of scripture and have successfully drawn people away from JW&SDA and other strange ways .But I guess that I fail the “Ark” test. The trouble is the message of Genesis and it’s amazingly beautiful stories get lost in the hunt to weed out the heterodox. Trouble is you can’t see the forest for the trees that way. I’ll be teaching on Genesis in the Fall and can’t wait. I have been studying ,reading and writing about it- I live and breathe it. God and His magnificent universe and His Word are very precious to me and very real.Faith and belief that does’nt live , breathe, grow is dead. My faith in His Word and in His Church are unshakeable- and my trust in it makes me very aware of my failings. My reading of the Bible doesn’t make me comfy and cozy&I don’t want to sit on my spiritual laurels. When i teach the “Beatitudes” I’m convicted of all the ways I have failed to live up to them and I share it with my class. When I read the prophets I am aware of how much I have failed to live up to the dictates of justice, mercy , care for the poor. When I read the Gospels and NT I tremble at the fact that I have fallen so short. It makes me wonder about myself and how am I fulfilling God’s commands if I pass that homeless person in the street- without giving him a thought- as a human being and child of God? then I remember God’s mercy and His neverending love and when He created humanity - He blessed it and saw that it was"good".That is what pushes me- that everyone in this world knows that God loved us to His death and that we are worthy not only of happiness but of Love- Divine and human- We were created in love and for love. Not the shallow cartoony /romantic kind but the Love that never dies and never gives out- a bottomless ocean of love.
God Bless ! Sorry for venting- I’ve been suffering from insomnia and I guess I needed to talk, or relax or something!!
D
D_M
Guest
I believe a flood occurred.
Wisdom 10:4 When the earth was flooded because of him, wisdom again save it, steering the righetous man by a paltry piece of wood.
Wisdom 14:6 For even in the beginning, when arrogant giants were perishing, the hope of the world took refuge on a raft, and guided by thy hand left to the world the seed of a new generation.
There is a story of a great flood in Greek mythology if I’m not mistaken. There is also native American oral stories about great floods. If one looked it would probably not be too difficult to find similar aspects of this story in most world mythologies.
In the seventeenth century when the Jesuits went to China they were given access to a recorded history of China, which was credible as well, that went back even further when the dating in Genesis says that the flood had occurred. Continously recorded astronomical events is what I seem to remember from what I read that gave it credibility. The Chinese insisted there could not have been any flood. When the Jesuits sent their findings to Europe, they were dismissed as Chinese errors!
And it was not until later in the scientific enlightenment, and Darwin’s work that people began to seriously question the narrative in Genesis on a more widespread level.
Although speaking of global floods, there were periods in recent ice ages when the melting ice would have created great inundations of entire continents… not submerging every last bit of land, but certainly placing much underwater for short periods which today we would recognize as land.
In North America for example, the great lakes, the Mississipi basin, the colorado river, and any number of other bodies are all believed to have been formed by glacial run-off.
Geological research in the United States in the twentieth century has theorized the existence of super floods in Montana and Washington that would have placed significant portions of these states underwater about sixty times during the break up of the glaciers 10,000 years ago. Some lakes would have risen over 300ft. One estimate has suggested that these floods could have had ten times as much force as all the rivers in the world combined. If that same sort of thing was happening not just in Montana, but in other places during this period, we might think there is perhaps more credibility to the idea of a ‘global flood’ occuring at some point than originally thought.
Although if that were true, the timeline in Genesis is a little bit off.
Wisdom 10:4 When the earth was flooded because of him, wisdom again save it, steering the righetous man by a paltry piece of wood.
Wisdom 14:6 For even in the beginning, when arrogant giants were perishing, the hope of the world took refuge on a raft, and guided by thy hand left to the world the seed of a new generation.
There is a story of a great flood in Greek mythology if I’m not mistaken. There is also native American oral stories about great floods. If one looked it would probably not be too difficult to find similar aspects of this story in most world mythologies.
In the seventeenth century when the Jesuits went to China they were given access to a recorded history of China, which was credible as well, that went back even further when the dating in Genesis says that the flood had occurred. Continously recorded astronomical events is what I seem to remember from what I read that gave it credibility. The Chinese insisted there could not have been any flood. When the Jesuits sent their findings to Europe, they were dismissed as Chinese errors!
And it was not until later in the scientific enlightenment, and Darwin’s work that people began to seriously question the narrative in Genesis on a more widespread level.
Although speaking of global floods, there were periods in recent ice ages when the melting ice would have created great inundations of entire continents… not submerging every last bit of land, but certainly placing much underwater for short periods which today we would recognize as land.
In North America for example, the great lakes, the Mississipi basin, the colorado river, and any number of other bodies are all believed to have been formed by glacial run-off.
Geological research in the United States in the twentieth century has theorized the existence of super floods in Montana and Washington that would have placed significant portions of these states underwater about sixty times during the break up of the glaciers 10,000 years ago. Some lakes would have risen over 300ft. One estimate has suggested that these floods could have had ten times as much force as all the rivers in the world combined. If that same sort of thing was happening not just in Montana, but in other places during this period, we might think there is perhaps more credibility to the idea of a ‘global flood’ occuring at some point than originally thought.
Although if that were true, the timeline in Genesis is a little bit off.
S
spauline
Guest
it is one thing to see minor stories as fully allegorical, such as Job, Jonah, and Tobias. It is another to diminish major epochs.They also believed that the world was a concave bowl.Or that the world is flat( flat earthers are still out there). There are variations of “cinderella” story all over the world also. that doesn’t make it so.many of these stories are archetypes- universal tales that all mankind can relate to. See k12nj.us - k12nj Resources and Information. will load a powerpoint presentation.There are links you can follow. What bothers me is that some people take this as a test of orthodoxy and “Catholicity”.How you measure up as a christian. I went to Bible School run by my diiocese, in a very conservative Archdiocese- studied for four years- was certificated and now teach Adult Bible Study for over four years - have taught all kinds of people and only here is my faith questioned! The funny thing is that people I teach say that there faith has increased- not decreased by the method I use.If you put people in a fundamentalist straight jacket you have fundamentalist faith. Anti- intellectual, no thought, narrow, crude one dimensional view of God, Jesus, the HS and the Church.! I personally think that idea diminishes God’s greatness putting Him on our level! I have tried to be a bulwark against the encroachment of Fundamentalist interpretation of scripture and have successfully drawn people away from JW&SDA and other strange ways .But I guess that I fail the “Ark” test. The trouble is the message of Genesis and it’s amazingly beautiful stories get lost in the hunt to weed out the heterodox. Trouble is you can’t see the forest for the trees that way. I’ll be teaching on Genesis in the Fall and can’t wait. I have been studying ,reading and writing about it- I live and breathe it. God and His magnificent universe and His Word are very precious to me and very real.Faith and belief that does’nt live , breathe, grow is dead. My faith in His Word and in His Church are unshakeable- and my trust in it makes me very aware of my failings. My reading of the Bible doesn’t make me comfy and cozy&I don’t want to sit on my spiritual laurels. When i teach the “Beatitudes” I’m convicted of all the ways I have failed to live up to them and I share it with my class. When I read the prophets I am aware of how much I have failed to live up to the dictates of justice, mercy , care for the poor. When I read the Gospels and NT I tremble at the fact that I have fallen so short. It makes me wonder about myself and how am I fulfilling God’s commands if I pass that homeless person in the street- without giving him a thought- as a human being and child of God? then I remember God’s mercy and His neverending love and when He created humanity - He blessed it and saw that it was"good".That is what pushes me- that everyone in this world knows that God loved us to His death and that we are worthy not only of happiness but of Love- Divine and human- We were created in love and for love. Not the shallow cartoony /romantic kind but the Love that never dies and never gives out- a bottomless ocean of love.
Admittedly, the Church has not resolved the question of whether there was a Flood in any sense, however you need to be aware tha the Catholic Tradition and Catechism lean toward the notion that in some sense, there was a major Divine Intervention in the Flood.
The reason for this is not prove that God can cause miracles, or to make the Bible scientific. It is because certain major manifestations of God’s intervention in human history were necessary to guide history toward the reception of the Messiah. For this reason, undefined Catholic teaching is there were certain major covenants that must have occurred in some sense to prepare the way for the ultimate covenant in Christ. The CCC references the Flood and Covenant with Noah, the division of man into nations, the Exodus, and the age of the prophets.
This thread is more important than you think. Assessing precisely what did and did not occur in major ages of Salvation history is going to be a big subject in Church theology real soon, because it has bearing on how to understand how humanity has gotten to be where it is at.
Little things, the Church can let slip. But big things? Think again. You are not yet a heretic yet, but you are approaching it.
J
juliamajor
Guest
it is one thing to see minor stories as fully allegorical, such as Job, Jonah, and Tobias. It is another to diminish major epochs.
Admittedly, the Church has not resolved the question of whether there was a Flood in any sense, however you need to be aware tha the Catholic Tradition and Catechism lean toward the notion that in some sense, there was a major Divine Intervention in the Flood.
The reason for this is not prove that God can cause miracles, or to make the Bible scientific. It is because certain major manifestations of God’s intervention in human history were necessary to guide history toward the reception of the Messiah. For this reason, undefined Catholic teaching is there were certain major covenants that must have occurred in some sense to prepare the way for the ultimate covenant in Christ. The CCC references the Flood and Covenant with Noah, the division of man into nations, the Exodus, and the age of the prophets.
This thread is more important than you think. Assessing precisely what did and did not occur in major ages of Salvation history is going to be a big subject in Church theology real soon, because it has bearing on how to understand how humanity has gotten to be where it is at.
Little things, the Church can let slip. But big things? Think again. You are not yet a heretic yet, but you are approaching it. Wow-judgmental much! You are sooo way out of line.- i’m glad you are not in charge of who heretics are- the only one who wouldn’t be thrown to the outer darkness would be you.I never saw
anyone as smug with their beliefs as you- oh, I misspoke- there in the gospels and are called Pharisees! Watch out for that log in your eye feller- it can be a real killer.
- Status