Noah's Ark?

[JackQ]

Does anybody else find this extremly haard to believe,im not doubting it,just need some opnions,the fact that noah built a ship big enough for all those animals,how could noah collect all the animals from the whole land,there wasnt enough water to cover the earth at this time,and also the animals would have got restless from the weather,and my final thought was how could they have enough food for them and all the animals for a whole year??
Very hard to accept,any opnions on this?

It wasn’t a ship, it was an ark: a large box. I think the question misses the point of the story.

 

[JackQ]

.
“Most” evidence? What credible study has said that?

Do you believe homosexuals are born that way? Scripture calls homosexual sin an abomination. If one is born that way wouldn’t that make God the creator of an abomination?

What side will you be on when homosexuality is declared to be “normal” by the entire scientific community? When that happens it will be mandated by law that homosexuality be taught as a normal attraction in schools. When that happens the lawyers will be lined up to sue the Church for not allowing homosexuals to marry. Will you stand with the Church or with science?

A Catholic that believes in scripture and Sacred Tradition as held by the Magisterium.

Are you a Catholic or a cafeteria Catholic?

Different people are tempted in different ways. It’s not much of a stretch of the imagination to say innate characteristics that one has contribute, in part, to what sins he finds tempting. I don’t see how the question of whether one is born with or acquires what are called homosexual tendencies impacts on Church teaching in the slightest. And what does this have to do with Noah’s ark?

 

[JackQ]

So are you a geocentrist as well? Because the Bible says in many places that the Earth is motionless and at the center of the universe.

Actually, to be a complete literalist you must believe that the earth is a flat disk supported by foundations, and that the sky is a solid dome.

 

[JackQ]

Well, Jesus seems to think Noah and his boat were real:

Mt 24: For as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 In (those) days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day that Noah entered the ark. 39 They did not know until the flood came and carried them all away. So will it be (also) at the coming of the Son of Man.

I like to quote Aesop’s fables when the situation is appropriate. Never once have I thought that any of the stories are historically true.

 

[JackQ]

Absolutely. Why would I believe in a theory? No scientific experiment has ever proven heliocentrism. The Church has never recanted its condemnation of Galileo. The book *Galileo Was Wrong the Church Was Right * lays out the case for geocentrism in my opinion

I don’t think he was condemned by the entire Church, just the tribunal in question. Either way, I do believe that under JPII the Church did issue an apology for the affair. I didn’t understand why, then. But I do now.

 

[JackQ]

Oh, so you’re one of those “The Earth is 6000 years old, there is no evolution people?”
Why would you believe in a theory? Gravity is only a theory too ya know

From my standpoint, it’s only a theory that anyone besides God and myself exist.

 

[JackQ]

I am skeptical of most claims of trying to keep Scripture from being ridiculed based on supposed scientific evidence. The key words are “with certainty.” As far as I’m concerned, there is no certainty here, just two camps. One side believes God can and has done anything, the other side consists mostly of what I call the Bible Explanation Industry. The claim that certain parts of the Bible must adhere to science inspired me to create the following book idea: The God Who Did Nothing - How the God of the Bible is Incapable of Miracles, especially in the Old Testament.

This should be the primary concern of all Catholics, not a “carved in stone and you must believe it today” scientific claim.

Peace,
Ed

Science has nothing to do with the story of the flood. It’s a story on a whole other level.

 

[JackQ]

Do you think there really was a Cinderella?

No, but there have been many wicked stepmothers.

 

[JackQ]

Geologists can determined no such thing. For one thing they weren’t there to witness whether or not there was a flood. There are geologists who admit that a catastrophic event took place thousands of years ago.
What we have is scripture and Church Tradition against science that rejects both.
There is geological evidence all over the world of a massive flood that was worldwide in scope. Once such place is Agate Springs Nebraska where every kind of animal was rapidly buried together by water.

visitscottsbluff.com/attractions/agate-fossil-beds

All coal is vegetable matter produced by the rapid burial of vegetation. Coal is found on every continent. Marine fossils have been found on mountain tops and salt lakes are found in the Tibetan plateau which are over sixteen thousand feet in height.

So, science isn’t any good, except sometimes it’s okay.

 

[Elizabeth502]

What side will you be on when homosexuality is declared to be “normal” by the entire scientific community? When that happens it will be mandated by law that homosexual “PRACTICE” is taught as a normal in schools. When that happens the lawyers will be lined up to sue the Church for not allowing homosexuals to marry. Will you stand with the Church or with science?

Why is this paragraph in the future tense?
I do regret that you seem unaware of the current state of curriculum in many public school districts.

Of course they will. The liberal lawyers will see that the Church is mandated to allow gay marriage.It will be a hate crime to deny them.

The previous paragraph is already in process. The second paragraph is well on the horizon.

 

[JackQ]

Ryan, what extreme liberals say notwithstanding, the Magisterium teaches that everything that is affirmed in Scripture is affirmed by the Holy Spirit Himself. Everything means everything. Since the Holy Spirit can neither deceive nor be deceived, this means that everything that is affirmed in Scripture is without error – regardless of the subject matter.

So, if one interprets a particular affirmation as being metaphorical in nature, that is OK as long as one recognizes the affirmation as being true and without any error. So for example if there were an affirmation in scripture that said, “It was raining cats and dogs” – one could interpret that as being metaphorical (which it obviously is) and understand it to be affirming that it was raining heavily – an affirmation that is true and without error. What is not permitted is to say that an affirmation in scripture is in error with respect to history but true with respect to its spirtiual meaning as explained above. So if one were to interpret the affirmations in scripture regarding Noah and the Flood as being metaphorical in nature and still true and without error, then that would not of itself contradict the Church’s doctrine. But if one were to say that some affirmations in scripture regarding Noah and the Flood were in error but that the spiritual meaning still remains true, then that would contradict the Church’s doctrine.

It’s also important to maintain an orthodox Christology.

I don’t know whether the magisterium has taught specifically on Noah and the Flood, but I suspect it must have touched on it over the centuries. I do know that recognizing a real Noah and the real Flood covering the whole earth is the historic, traditional Catholic position. This site has a nice question and answer page:

kolbecenter.org/q_and_a.html
“7. Does the church teach that the flood of Noah was a real historic event or a myth?”

But it’s under construction so no answer is provided yet.

Here’s the main page though:
kolbecenter.org/

The extreme liberals who put together the Catechism refer to the “symbolism” of the flood, saying that “refers to baptism.” (CCC, par. 701.)

 

[Third_Day]

=Elizabeth502;7696542]Why is this paragraph in the future tense?
I do regret that you seem unaware of the current state of curriculum in many public school districts.

I put it in the future tense because it is not yet mandated by the Supreme Court but one day the liberals will have their way.

The previous paragraph is already in process. The second paragraph is well on the horizon.

Agree completely but there are many Catholics who ignore what is on the horizon and what is alreadly in progress.

 

[Third_Day]

Again, this argument is absurd. This will never happen. Look at Westboro Baptist Church and the recent Supreme Court decision regarding their right to protest soldiers’funerals with signs that say “God hates fags” and you will see how remote the possibility is. Hey, you can make your own sign and join them!

That was a free speech issue. Gay marriage will become a civil rights issue and the day will come when it will be forced upon the Church.

 

[Third_Day]

=JackQ;7696449] I don’t see how the question of whether one is born with or acquires what are called homosexual tendencies impacts on Church teaching in the slightest

.
It doesn’t have an impact on Church teaching but if one believes that science trumps scripture then the day will come when it will have an impact on the members of the Church… Those that believe everything science says is fact will reject Church teaching.

And what does this have to do with Noah’s ark?

Absolutely nothing.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I put it in the future tense because it is not yet mandated by the Supreme Court but one day the liberals will have their way.

Mandated or not, it is, present tense, being locally implemented. Many parents have objected to this indoctrination, and have been told they have no permission to opt out of it. They would have to take such objections to the courts in progressive sequence.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

That was a free speech issue. Gay marriage will become a civil rights issue and the day will come when it will be forced upon the Church.

Forced? So you believe a day will come when the Church will perform gay marriages then? No.

Also, the U.S. may allow gay marriage at some point, but they can’t and won’t force individual religions to do so. To believe that they will do something even remotely like this is alarmist and without precedent.

 

[Third_Day]

=Thoughtfulone;7696737]Forced? So you believe a day will come when the Church will perform gay marriages then? No.

That is the day that Catholic Bishops will go to prison rather than obey the secular law.

Also, the U.S. may allow gay marriage at some point, but they can’t and won’t force individual religions to do so. To believe that they will do something even remotely like this is alarmist and without precedent

It was once thought that abortion would never be legal.

If gay marriage is so remote why did religious leaders of all faiths sign the Manhatten Declaration?

manhattandeclaration.org/the-declaration/read.aspx

 

[Third_Day]

Actually, to be a complete literalist you must believe that the earth is a flat disk supported by foundations, and that the sky is a solid dome.

Where does Genesis say the earth is flat and the sky is a solid dome?

I don’t think he was condemned by the entire Church, just the tribunal in question. Either way, I do believe that under JPII the Church did issue an apology for the affair. I didn’t understand why, then. But I do now.

John Paul II never never said Galileo was correct and the Church was wrong. I 'd love for you to show me those very words out of his mouth.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

It was once thought that abortion would never be legal.

 

[Third_Day]

Abortion granted by the state has nothing to do with regulating another person’s religious beliefs. When they start forcing Catholics in America to have abortions, then this argument will have some merit.