The Flood

[Ark Guy]

I would be happy to have a discussion on this issue, but it seems to me that it would be inappropriate to further derail a thread specifically about Catholic beliefs about the Flood. Since, so far as I know, neither of us is Catholic, this is probably the wrong place for such a discussion.

The above list contained Noah. According to some, Noah was not a real person.

The post therefore was on topic and asking for someone to explain to me/us where the linage of Christ changes from fact to fiction. If Noah was not a real person, or if Adam was not a real person then this need explaining.

 

[Michelina]

In 1973, Mary mentioned the "deluge" at Akita when she warned of something worse being prepared for the earth if men didn't repent. This apparition has Church approval, so it would seem to be an endorsement of a real flood of the earth.

Of course, I don't know how that jives with God's promise not to do what He did ever again?

I have read the words of Our Mother at Akita, but don't remember it being implied that there will be another flood, but that something WORSE will happen.

Was I wrong?

 

[Michelina]

Larry, the Church doesn't teach Science, Physics, Geological History, etc. The position of the Church is that the SS are inspired by God and communicate Truth, but do not necessarily teach scientific facts. Literary genres used in the OT are to be treated as such.

While I personally believe that there was a global flood (and the scientific evidence is becoming so overwhelming that secular scientists are beginning to admit this ), it is not a matter of faith for us. Some flood event did occur. But that is NOT the message of theGenesis account. The message is: God regretted that He had made man. Is that literally true? No, but that is how it was expressed by the author of the account. But I do believe the account of what physically hapenned is literally true, even if incomplete.

BTW, if you study the account carefully, you can clearly understand why the rainbow is a symbol of God's promise.

 

[Michelina]

Historically, every civilization in the Near and Middle East in the 9000 to 3000 BC timeframe had a "Great Flood Story" all of them similar but very different in tone. The Hebrew flood story is the only one that has a moral. This is the one found in the Bible.

Most of the flood accounts have a 'moral', namely that some Divine Being was punishing humans for having done something wrong. These stories can be found around the world.

 

[Larry]

Thank you for the replies. I guess, with a few exceptions, the Catholic members here view the flood as alogorical in nature. I respect the views of all who have responded.



To Ark Guy:

This is the One Bread One Body forum. Your arguments are out of place in this forum. Non-Catholics are permitted to ask questions of Catholics here, but not permitted to argue points. You went a bit overboard in your replies here. I have started a similar thread in the Creation Science & Theistic Evolution forum. You can reply in that thread.

 

[Spotty]

If Adam is an allegorical person and not really created as per Genesis, that is he was an evolved being...then where does this list change from fact to allegory?


Can you bible believing allegorist tell me?

I'd say somewhere between Abraham and Noah.

 

[Spotty]

If Genesis is just an myth...then why do the NT authors lie when they talk about it?

Think about it, if the bible is fulled with so many errors as the Theo-Evo crowd requires..then what good is it? How do you seperate the fact from fiction?

They don't "lie" about it.

Scripture is useful for what? 2 Timothy 3:15-17. It says nothing about scientific or historical accuarcy. Rather, it states it is God breathed for a purpose. Not that it is God-breathed period. Therefore, Scripture is authoritatve as far and only as far as the aforemetioned purpose allows it to be. Read the verses and you'll see its uses, to answer your question, are related to the attributes of righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ for our salvation. Not who said what when or when and if there was a literal flood: the message of Scripture stays the same.

Christ can be traced back to David in a biological lineage, and to Adam in a spiritual lineage though no prophecy requires him to be traced to Adam as a real man.

I don't have all the answers, Ark, though I do have knowledge and reason enough to know that Adam was not the first man to exist in 4004 BC (when Creationists traditionally give the start date). Science is objective, and we can be sure that since according to Paul nature is God's proof, that nature wouldn't lie. Nature is old because it says it is old. Theology is in the Bible. Science is in Nature. They don't have to contradict. If science (archeology, cosmic foundations and times) doesn't mesh with our interpretation of the Bible, then we can be sure that our interpretation is at fault - not the Bible itself.

-Spotty

 

[Dominus Fidelis]

...edit...wrong thread...