The Flood

  • Thread starter Thread starter JakeG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
JakeG said:
I would find it very hard to believe in a literal flood that wiped out the whole of humanity.

I would also find it hard to believe in a literal ark that carried two of all animals.

NB:

?
Click to expand...
Jesus believed in the flood and referred to it as a prototype of what will happen
at the end of time ( Just as it was in the days of Noah )
 
Faith1960 said:
Are we required to believe only eight people survived this flood, if it happened?
Click to expand...
Let’s suppose you were watching the evening news, and you saw a report of a bus crash in your town. The news anchor says, “eight people survived the crash.” Would you take this to mean that the crash affected every human on earth, and therefore, only eight people were now alive on earth? 😉

If you choose to believe that the flood wasn’t historically a global event, then it’s possible to believe both that eight survived the flood and that they weren’t the only persons on earth alive at that time.
 
The Bible clearly moves away from the metaphorical. The Ark is described. Instructions are given as to its size, that it be made of gopher wood and so on. Now, none of that has to do with Baptism. People have built replicas of the Ark and found them to be completely seaworthy and able to handle high waves.

I have no reason to believe a global flood did not occur.

Ed
 
edwest2 said:
The Bible clearly moves away from the metaphorical. The Ark is described. Instructions are given as to its size, that it be made of gopher wood and so on. Now, none of that has to do with Baptism. People have built replicas of the Ark and found them to be completely seaworthy and able to handle high waves.

I have no reason to believe a global flood did not occur.

Ed
Click to expand...
Or a regional flood where all mankind died. It is hard to imagine global flood where the whole globe is covered with water because the water has to come from somewhere before the flood and go somewhere after the flood. Melting ice and refrozen ice over roughly a year seems a bit far fetch too.
 
ericc said:
Or a regional flood where all mankind died. It is hard to imagine global flood where the whole globe is covered with water because the water has to come from somewhere before the flood and go somewhere after the flood. Melting ice and refrozen ice over roughly a year seems a bit far fetch too.
Click to expand...
the continents could see-saw so one half is under water then the other…
 
Am I correct in saying that the Church has no set dogma on whether there was an actual global flood, that Catholics are free to interpret the flood narrative as either literal or metaphorical?

I can find no definitive answer including from my priest.

NB:

I’m not talking about what individuals may believe to be true. I’m asking about actual Church dogma.
 
JakeG said:
Am I correct in saying that the Church has no set dogma on whether there was an actual global flood, that Catholics are free to interpret the flood narrative as either literal or metaphorical?

I can find no definitive answer including from my priest.

NB:

I’m not talking about what individuals may believe to be true. I’m asking about actual Church dogma.
Click to expand...
I thought I gave you the answer in the link I posted to which you responded that it answered your question.
 
[Matthew]
{24:37} And just as in the days of Noah, so also will be the advent of the Son of man.
{24:38} For it will be just as it was in the days before the flood: eating and drinking, marrying and being given in marriage, even until that day when Noah entered into the ark.
{24:39} And they did not realize it, until the flood came and took them all away. So also will the advent of the Son of man be.

Jesus speaks of the Flood as a literal event. He compares it to the literal event of His Return. If the Flood were entirely fictional, the comparison would not work.

But neither do we have to hold that the Biblical description of the Flood is entirely literal on every point. Adam and Eve must have existed, since original sin is a literal truth, not merely figurative. But their story is told using figures.

In the same way, the Flood was a literal event, but the story uses figures to describe what happened: the extent of the Flood, the extent of the damage, the size of the Ark and the number of animals it held, can all be figurative elements.

My view is that the Flood occurred (2807 B.C.) as a result of a comet impact in the deep ocean (W. Bruce Masse’s theory). The event did not kill all human and animal life outside the Ark, not did the waters cover all land, so the Ark did not need to hold literally every species of animal on earth.
 
Catholic Encyclopedia on the historicity of the Flood:
newadvent.org/cathen/04702a.htm

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 17:26-27. 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.

The Magisterium has not ruled on the subject, to my knowledge, but the support for some level of historicity of the Flood is strong.
 
Ron_Conte said:
Jesus speaks of the Flood as a literal event.

In the same way, the Flood was a literal event, but the story uses figures to describe what happened: the extent of the Flood, the extent of the damage, the size of the Ark and the number of animals it held, can all be figurative elements.
Click to expand...
👍
 
thistle said:
I thought I gave you the answer in the link I posted to which you responded that it answered your question.
Click to expand...
You did.

And I did.

And I should have referred to it.

But since then I’ve received several contradictory responses outside this forum. It appears that most Catholics I meet believe a literal worldwide flood is Catholic dogma.
 
JakeG said:
You did.

And I did.

And I should have referred to it.

But since then I’ve received several contradictory responses outside this forum. It appears that most Catholics I meet believe a literal worldwide flood is Catholic dogma.
Click to expand...
It is NOT DOGMA so you can tell them. If they refuse to believe you then ask them to provide a Church document to support their claim. All Church teachings are documented.
 
Nelka said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Be careful of the word world
To ancients it meant those areas that were known
In the New Testament the world would b the confines of the Roman Empire.
I believe there was a huge flood .
The End of the last ice age would have triggered flooding beyond anything we can comprehend
Remember population tend to populate coastal areas or river valleys .the deaths could have been massive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top