The Flood.......Again

[MaryHelp777]

The Ark Tablet dates to Babylon.

When Armenians read in the early translations that the Ark had come to rest in “the mountains of Armenia,” they understood it to be the one tall mountain in this area, Agri Dagi (traditional Mount Ararat in Turkey), which rises dramatically from the plain of the Araxes.
The Bible gives us a clear direction for the landing location of the Ark as landing on Mount Ararat. The Bible says that Noah and the other 7 survivors of the flood journeyed “from the east” and subsequently settled in “Shinar” (a region generally known as Babylon) the place that the Ark Tablet dates to.

 

[MaryHelp777]

Fossilized clams were also found in abundance on the mountain peak of Takht-i-Suleiman in the Middle East at 14, 000 feet above sea level.

Nicholas of Damascus, the biographer of Herod the Great (about 30 BC), referred to an object considered to be the remnant beams of Noah’s ark in Armenia, the Biblical equivalent of Ararat. “Above the country of the Minus in Armenia a great mountain, where as the story goes many refugees found safety at the time of the flood, and one man transported upon the ark grounded upon the summit: and relics of the timber were for long preserved."

 

[Tim_D]

Following this, I see no reason why Noah did not exist, and if people want to believe he did, as I do believe all the characters from Genesis mentioned do exist, this is not ‘fundamentalism’.

But it does not follow! You go from speaking of “figurative language” to every degree of literal certainty! Something cannot be both figurative and literal.

Also, “fundamentalism” means that one takes the written word literally because it is the written word. I knew a guy who said that if it’s in the Bible, the he believes it. That is fundamentalism.

 

[friardchips]

But it does not follow! You go from speaking of “figurative language” to every degree of literal certainty! Something cannot be both figurative and literal.

Yes, I noticed that too, after posting. What the CCC means, is that it cannot give the event of Adam and Eve a date and so we cannot say it is historical in the way we can say 9/11 happened; similarly, we know Original Sin is true, and that there are mystical truths within the Creation text, and we know a primeval event happened in order for it to make sense, so the language used, we have to say is “figurative” - it speaks of things not only in tangible reality but that which occurred in the spiritual realms and on soul level - and so we cannot use literal language as we can if we were to talk about 9/11. The language is figurative. Nevertheless, this does mean that the conversations didn’t happen, didn’t exist, or that the event was not historical, but rather, that the ‘nature’ of the event places it into the language of the figurative. How can one explain Original Sin in literal terms. When speaking of spiritual realms combined with tangible reality, it is too easy to say everything is only a metaphor or analogy, but it does not necessarily mean it is. Reality exists on many levels and writing about it is made more possible - to get the full meaning - when inspired by the Holy Spirit with the aid of figurative language.

Also, “fundamentalism” means that one takes the written word literally because it is the written word. I knew a guy who said that if it’s in the Bible, the he believes it. That is fundamentalism.

In terms of ‘spiritually true’ he might be right but if he doesn’t mean that then he would be incorrect because we know that some passages in the Bible are not to be taken literally. It might even be heresy to believe they are literal.

 

[MaryHelp777]

Mysterious metal lumps have been discovered over the years along the ocean floor and examined by scientists.

These metallic pellets provide strong evidence that most seafloor sediments were deposited rapidly, not gradually over millions of years. evidence of the Genesis Flood.

“These were very, very circular, which is strange,” Colin Devey, chief scientist for the expedition and a volcanologist at the GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Devey tells LiveScience. “They usually look like cow flops.”

it’s evidence of the Genesis Flood and Noah’s ark.

Toward the end of the Genesis Flood, sheets of water receding off the continents would have rapidly eroded and dumped enormous amounts of sediment into the ocean basins,". "The presence of geological features called planation surfaces on every continent is very difficult for uniformitarian scientists to explain, but it is perfectly consistent with the Flood’s rapid erosion and deposition of sediment.

Explaining also the findings of fossilized sea-life that has been discovered on mountain peaks throughout the world.

 

[friardchips]

But it does not follow! You go from speaking of “figurative language” to every degree of literal certainty! Something cannot be both figurative and literal.

And, yes it can: one can know an event happened, or must have happened, and this event can be expressed in literal terms - the parts we know for certain, whether in physical or spiritual reality, or combined - and with the help of faith-induced reasoning, fed by these parts that are literal, can feed from their support, the rest that is not literal, with figurative language expressing the meaning which needs to be expressed that cannot be communicated with literal language only.

 

[MaryHelp777]

Jesus believed that the Flood killed every person not on the Ark. He likened the coming world judgment to the judgment of “all” men in the days of Noah (Matthew 24:37–39)?

In 2 Peter 3, the coming judgment by fire is likened to the former judgment by water in Noah’s Flood.

 

[Evania]

Actually, as I have posted the Church does make clear that the early book of Genesis are not meant to be a scientific or profane historical account of the beginning of things. It is the message, not the means which is the important part. I am simply amazed that so many (not directed at you, Evania) take a position that if we allow that one facet is not literally and historically “true,” then somehow that brings down the whole house of cards.

I realize that. I personally have no idea if the Flood happened exactly as presented in the Bible. But here’s the kicker…neither does the Church. The first account was written years after the fact, traditionally held to be penned by Moses, but it is still the revealed Word of God. They have never said outright that it never happened. And since the Church doesn’t know, they are right in saying that the message is what counts. And it IS what counts!

My issue is that you used a parable to counteract Mary Help’s quote that “God never lies.” A parable was always intended to be a story and it is presented as such in the Bible. A lie is something that involves deliberate deception. It clearly says that even His audience knew about His use of parables as indicated in Matthew 13:10 and that they were never meant to be taken literally. However, like I said, in the account of the Flood the Bible doesn’t explain one way or another and so we are free to think whatever we want. The Church hasn’t codemned any position. The fact that there is evidence pointing to support Scripture shouldn’t be a threat to anyone who holds a differing opinion on this. If anything it just makes the conversation that much more intriguing. I’m not 100% entrenched in any position and I’m choosing to keep an open mind. The only position I hold is, “Nothing is outside of God’s capabilities, and His Mind is infinite while mine is finite.” So I’m not going to put it outside the realm of possibility.

 

[HelenRose]

This harkens back to your thread about can there be historical errors in the Bible.

How many times does it need to be mentioned that the Church does not teach a literal reading of the early books of Genesis?

Over and over again.

The Jews were wonderful story tellers. I expect that all ancient peoples whose histories have lasted were wonderful story tellers. They told their history in stories. Some stories were actual events. Some stories were based on actual events. Some stories were the literature and poetry of the people.

Do we call Charles Dickens or Tolstoy liars? Of course not. Even though they wrote fiction they wrote the truth about the times and conditions of their countries.

Do we call Dan Brown a liar? Most certainly.

Good stories tell the truth - whether it is a story of fiction or a story about an actual event.

My all time favorite story in the Old Testament is the story of Jonah and the Whale. Never has there been a truer story about human nature. Was Jonah swallowed by a whale? Did he convert Nineveh? My guess is probably not. But did that story tell the truth? Oh my yes. Watching Jonah sitting underneath that tree complaining about God’s mercy, is such a perfect picture of human nature.

Our Lord Jesus Christ came from a people of story tellers and His stories will last forever.
Just to name a few:
The Parable of the Prodigal Son
The Parable of the Foolish Man and Wise Man
The Parable of the Tenant Farmers
The Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus
The Parable of the of the Lost Sheep
The parable of the Dishonest Steward

These stories were not actual events but Christ was speaking the truth when He told them to His disciples.

 

[MaryHelp777]

The first account was written years after the fact, traditionally held to be penned by Moses, .

Moses may have penned the Great Flood into scripture.

But 5 of the World’s most ancient BC civilisations all have a historic World Flood story. Including Babylon 1,000 Bc, where the Ark Tablet was found bearing the exact measurements God gave Noah of the Ark, with also the orders in ancient Assyrian “animals” “two by two”,
And Babylon is historically where Noah and his family built residence after the Ark settled on Ararat. Babylon also being where the Ark Tablet’s origin.

The world’s ancient civilisations have a historic World Flood story, and geology and history have evidence of a world Flood, historians mention sitings of Noah’s Ark frozen on Mount Ararat as far back as 100 Bc, and Ararat is an unusual mountain in that it has permanent ice on its summit. Armenians translation of Ararat is one peak that the Bible mentions. And the entire Armenian nation have the Ark on their national flag, and passed down through word of mouth over the thousands of years, they profess that it is frozen beneath the ice on Ararat’s peak.
Historians pre Jesus time, from the ancient world have also mentioned it was visible during certain years.

 

[Richca]

This harkens back to your thread about can there be historical errors in the Bible.

How many times does it need to be mentioned that the Church does not teach a literal reading of the early books of Genesis?

I do not agree entirely with your interpretation of the teaching of the Church nor have I read in any official document of the Church what you appear to be claiming it to teach here. For the history of origins in Genesis 1-11 is not simply a collection of religious truths in narrative form but it is presented by the inspired author as real history. “For the author of Genesis history was the record of the deeds of God, the sphere in which he had revealed himself to man; the writing of history was, therefore, the only theology he knew. A recognition of the author’s historical purpose must be our first principle of the interpretation of Genesis…” (A New Catholic Commentary on Holy Scripture).

For example, in the first three chapters of Genesis, the inspired author is laying down the history of the origins of the world and everything in it and its creation by God; the creation of the first man and woman in original holiness and justice; the commandment God gave to them and their fall; the consequences of the disobedience of Adam and Eve in breaking God’s commandment and the penalty of suffering and death which has been passed on to all the descendants of our first parents. All this the Church presents to us for our belief as real history as the inspired author of Genesis lays down. This is divine revelation.

As far as the Flood, There is no indication in the entire Bible that it was not a real historical event and the inspired author of Genesis takes this story from ancient sources as apparently a real historical event that happened sometime in the history of the human race and gives it a theological meaning in contrast to just some event that happened only according to the forces of nature. As other posters have mentioned, Peter and Jesus himself appear to refer to the Flood, Noah and the ark as actual historical events and St Paul says to “Make your own the mind of Christ Jesus” (Phillipians 2:5).

Now, the poster of post #110 states from Ask an apologist that the Church does not have a dogmatic teaching on the Flood and that there are several differing opinions a catholic can legitimately hold. One of these opinions it is stated is that the story of the Flood is not literally true though the Church has not stated dogmatically that this is the case nor do I see how it ever could. I think in all references to Noah and the Flood in Holy Scripture and in official documents of the Church, the sense is that Noah was a real person and the Flood was a real historical event. So, the other opinion stated in post #110 is that a catholic can legitimately hold that the Flood was a real historical event as set down by the author of Genesis. This amounts to a literal intepretation of the story. So, a statement that the Church dogmatically teaches that the early chapters of Genesis are not to be read literally as history in some manner, as far as I’m aware of, is nowhere to be found in the teaching of the Church nor in its entire Tradition. Nor do I think that one can reasonably hold to a non-historical opinion of the Flood and apply this kind of interpretation to the entire Old Testament and all the events and stories recorded therein. This would certainly not be the mind of the Church nor the inspired authors. For Holy Scripture is divine revelation which is God revealing Himself in the actual history of the human race.

Again, concerning the Flood, if one holds to an apparently legitimate opinion as a non-historical event, this non-historicity should not be construed as the dogmatic teaching of the Church, for the Church has not stated dogmatically that the Flood was not a real historical event and one can hold to the literal interpretation of the event as a real historical event which in my view is the “safe” interpretation. For the story is rich in figures and symbolism and finds its fulfillment in the New Testament as St Peter says the Flood and the Ark prefigured baptism (1 Peter 3:21).

 

[Nogginer]

Know this first of all, that in the last days scoffers will come [to] scoff, living according to their own desires
4
and saying, “Where is the promise of his coming?* From the time when our ancestors fell asleep, everything has remained as it was from the beginning of creation.”
5
They deliberately ignore the fact that the heavens existed of old and earth was formed out of water and through water* by the word of God;
6
through these the world that then existed was destroyed, deluged with water.

2 Peter 3:3-6 New American Bible

In this passage St. Peter, inspired by God, wrote of people who would “deliberately ignore” the historical facts of how the world was created, and how God destroyed it in a great flood. Because they don’t see such things happening today, they assume “everything has remained as it was from the beginning of creation”. I would be very curious to see how someone would interpret this passage while viewing the flood as non-literal.

Modern science is far from reliable when it comes to understanding one-time events which happened thousands of years ago. Today they may say that the genetic bottleneck only went down to 10,000 people, but next year they may say it was 200,000, and the year after they may say 5 people. They get things wrong all the time in this field because so much of it involves speculation and faulty assumptions. I would much rather take the Bible as literal than rely on shifting speculative human theories.

 

[mikekle]

2 Peter 3:3-6 New American Bible

In this passage St. Peter, inspired by God, wrote of people who would “deliberately ignore” the historical facts of how the world was created, and how God destroyed it in a great flood. Because they don’t see such things happening today, they assume “everything has remained as it was from the beginning of creation”. I would be very curious to see how someone would interpret this passage while viewing the flood as non-literal.

Modern science is far from reliable when it comes to understanding one-time events which happened thousands of years ago. Today they may say that the genetic bottleneck only went down to 10,000 people, but next year they may say it was 200,000, and the year after they may say 5 people. They get things wrong all the time in this field because so much of it involves speculation and faulty assumptions. I would much rather take the Bible as literal than rely on shifting speculative human theories.

I agree, this section also explains why so many people deny the times we are living (end times)…

** From the time when our ancestors fell asleep, everything has remained as it was from the beginning of creation.”** , When they are shown the signs Jesus warned us about, they make the claim that these things have happened in every generation, therefore denying that we are even in the end times.

 

[friardchips]

I agree, this section also explains why so many people deny the times we are living (end times)…

** From the time when our ancestors fell asleep, everything has remained as it was from the beginning of creation.”** , When they are shown the signs Jesus warned us about, they make the claim that these things have happened in every generation, therefore denying that we are even in the end times.

He also told us that it is not for us “to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by His own authority”, and so, ‘end times’ warnings by all and sundry every five minutes in the news by whomever and by whatever means is not helping anything or anyone.

 

[Eliza10]

… The Jews were wonderful story tellers. …

…Charles Dickens or Tolstoy…

…Our Lord Jesus Christ came from a people of story tellers …

:hypno: Jesus as a storyteller from a long line of storytellers? NO.:dts:
I find that idea extremely offensive!

Jesus was from Heaven, Omniscient God Himself. All Light and All Truth.

My all time favorite story in the Old Testament is the story of Jonah and the Whale. … Was Jonah swallowed by a whale? Did he convert Nineveh? My guess is probably not. …

Too many of us for too long have been encouraged to look at the Word for ourselves and ask ourselves what we think of it, and come to our own conclusions. I am sorry you never had true teachers of God’s word to tell that this is not how you look at scripture. Holy Scripture needs to be looked at closely to determine the intent of God, not just our own feeling-reaction to it, combined with our creative thinking about what it means.

The Old Testament is the story of God’s people, and how He intervened and interacted with them. Jonah is a real person in history whom God spoke to. Nineveh is a real place in time and history. No made-up people and places.

In the case of Jonah and the fish, we have in Sacred Scripture the very words of Our Lord Jesus in Matthew 12:40 to show us exactly how Jesus himself viewed the TRUE story of Jonah. Yes, the very words of our Lord Jesus Christ our Lord concerning this are recorded in scripture so that we can be instructed, reproved and corrected, and these words have been with us over 2000 years and they will endure on earth until the last day in time. Here they are:

"For even as Jonas was in the belly of the great fish three days and three nights, thus shall the Son of man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights."

If it were a fairy tale or pretend-story, then Jesus would be declaring here:

“Even as our fictional friend Jonah was in the fictional fish three days in our favorite story-fable,* so also will I be* in the heart of the earth for 3 days.” :ehh:

Not a very impactful statement - to prophesy the most central event in the history of all of mankind to an event that was not historical, but fictional.

It just makes no sense. But you can find that out by reading it closely yourself. To interpret Jonah as Tolstoy-like fiction (good fiction!) is to imply that Jesus’ 3 days in the heart of the earth were like (good) fiction.

As to Jonah not being in the whale, I guess since most of us don’t know anyone personally who spent 3 days in a fish, one would conclude this didn’t happen. But it is possible to spend 3 days in a fish. Its not common, though. If it were common, it wouldn’t be a very memorable story, would it? Hardly worth recording in scripture and remembering for all time, and being referred to by Jesus in prophesy. Apparently God wanted what happened to be very memorable. And it was. Jonah’s memorable happening in the history of man foretold the salvation of mankind.

 

[mikekle]

:hypno: Jesus as a storyteller from a long line of storytellers? NO.:dts:
I find that idea extremely offensive!

Jesus was from Heaven, Omniscient God Himself. All Light and All Truth.

Too many of us for too long have been encouraged to look at the Word for ourselves and ask ourselves what we think of it, and come to our own conclusions. I am sorry you never had true teachers of God’s word to tell that this is not how you look at scripture. Holy Scripture needs to be looked at closely to determine the intent of God, not just our own feeling-reaction to it, combined with our creative thinking about what it means.

The Old Testament is the story of God’s people, and how He intervened and interacted with them. Jonah is a real person in history whom God spoke to. Nineveh is a real place in time and history. No made-up people and places.

In the case of Jonah and the fish, we have in Sacred Scripture the very words of Our Lord Jesus in Matthew 12:40 to show us exactly how Jesus himself viewed the TRUE story of Jonah. Yes, the very words of our Lord Jesus Christ our Lord concerning this are recorded in scripture so that we can be instructed, reproved and corrected, and these words have been with us over 2000 years and they will endure on earth until the last day in time. Here they are:

"For even as Jonas was in the belly of the great fish three days and three nights, thus shall the Son of man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights."

If it were a fairy tale or pretend-story, then Jesus would be declaring here:

“Even as our fictional friend Jonah was in the fictional fish three days in our favorite story-fable,* so also will I be* in the heart of the earth for 3 days.” :ehh:

Not a very impactful statement - to prophesy the most central event in the history of all of mankind to an event that was not historical, but fictional.

It just makes no sense. But you can find that out by reading it closely yourself. To interpret Jonah as Tolstoy-like fiction (good fiction!) is to imply that Jesus’ 3 days in the heart of the earth were like (good) fiction.

As to Jonah not being in the whale, I guess since most of us don’t know anyone personally who spent 3 days in a fish, one would conclude this didn’t happen. But it is possible to spend 3 days in a fish. Its not common, though. If it were common, it wouldn’t be a very memorable story, would it? Hardly worth recording in scripture and remembering for all time, and being referred to by Jesus in prophesy. Apparently God wanted what happened to be very memorable. And it was. Jonah’s memorable happening in the history of man foretold the salvation of mankind.

I dont know, I tend to think Jonah DID spend 3 days inside some kind of large aquatic animal, we already know there were large things in the sea back then (Leviathan), and trying to figure of the logistics of jonah being able to spend that amount of time there,is pointless, God can do anything, if he desired Jonah to do this, Im sure God could make it happen without any harm coming to him.

This story and some others in the bible that seem crazy or too unbelievable to us in modern times, I think too many people dispute these things due to them sounding so outlandish, and then of course try to find some explanation that is more realistic.

 

[Eliza10]

I dont know, I tend to think Jonah DID spend 3 days inside some kind of large aquatic animal,

You and Jesus both

we already know there were large things in the sea back then (Leviathan), and trying to figure of the logistics of jonah being able to spend that amount of time there

In the past I have read plausible-enough explanations to convince me its possible. I just googled “how could Jonah have spent 3 days in a fish?” and got some results, none of which I looked into, but you might want to.

,is pointless, God can do anything, if he desired Jonah to do this, Im sure God could make it happen without any harm coming to him.

Yes, God can do anything. Most likely He did this without violating natural law, IMO…

This story and some others in the bible that seem crazy or too unbelievable to us in modern times,

Well, its so unusual and novel that it certainly is memorable, isn’t it? Its really sticks in your mind. Its a story no one will ever forget. I think that is what God intended!

I think too many people dispute these things due to them sounding so outlandish, and then of course try to find some explanation that is more realistic.

Well, skeptics abound, and they take any excuse to doubt, and any excuse to be the real expert with the answers.

 

[You]

could have been a whale… whales go to the Med. sea to calf but they feed in deeper colder oceans, migrating between the two every year. So when in the Med sea they are fasting and have empty stomachs.
Whale digestion is a bit like a bird. They have a holding stomach like a birds crop and right after that the actual digesting stomach with its digestive acids. The whale fills its crop with krill and gradually feeds them into its stomach.
But while in the Med its stomach and crop are empty and would be, well the crop at any rate, would be a clean, warm place to rest in with no digestive acids and the whale not being in a feeding cycle would not be trying to move you into its actual stomach.
The whales throat at its widest could manage to swallow a beachball. If Jonah was a reasonably slight man he could slide down, keeping his arms in, quite easily.