Noah And The Great Flood

[cmotherofpirl]

In addition to being currently the highest mountain in Turkey ( its a volcano), Ararat also refers as indicated in the Bible a mountain RANGE, not just a specific peak.

[Mark of the Cross]

So are you saying that Noahs flood, ark and all that are literal but they got the dating wrong?
Mass extinctions are evidenced as occurring quite regularly. Whenever I go to the national park I can see where ancient sea beds have been violently disrupted on a very regular basis. Uluru (Ayers rock) has even been turned at right angles. I don't have a problem with something more than a local fishermans tsunami. At some time in the future we are going to have a planetary mass extinction of grand proportions. I do have a problem with the ark story as told in the Bible. The concept of male and female of species allows for genetic diversity. The idea of re-population from a single pair doesn't seem feasible on the basis that inbreeding results in degeneration. In evolution we have numerous combinations from diversified breeding. The weak ones die out and the strong survive. Animal breeders take advantage of this by interbreeding with quality stock. With Noah's off-spring we are faced once again with the problem of inbreeding and incest. Some other survivors? The ark was thousands of metres up a mountain at an altitude which is generally uninhabitable except by the experienced and equiped. Our ancestors were Yetis? After the water rapidly receded it would have been a very slippery decent down the mountain.

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1335755804' post='2425061']
In addition to being currently the highest mountain in Turkey ( its a volcano), Ararat also refers as indicated in the Bible a mountain RANGE, not just a specific peak.
[/quote]
Doesn't help!

[MissScripture]

Noah actually took 2 males and 2 females of every unclean land animal and 7 males and 7 females of every clean animal, and 7 males and 7 females of the birds. Genesis 7:2-3.

[cmotherofpirl]

if you really have a lot of time, here is a Scripture commentary for the Book of Genesis: [url="http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=81"]http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=81[/url]

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='MissScripture' timestamp='1335761411' post='2425099']
Noah actually took 2 males and 2 females of every unclean land animal and 7 males and 7 females of every clean animal, and 7 males and 7 females of the birds. Genesis 7:2-3.
[/quote]
I believe there is some confusion over the number, however I'm not sufficiently versed to comment on that issue.
[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1335762073' post='2425103']
if you really have a lot of time, here is a Scripture commentary for the Book of Genesis: [url="http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/most/getwork.cfm?worknum=81"]http://www.catholicc....cfm?worknum=81[/url]
[/quote]
Not intending to be unpleasant but you're being an extremist .

In the NT the word parable is used quite frequently. There are truths and there are parables are there not?
In the story of Job whether or not this man really existed or if it is a parable is quite irrelevant to the message and therefore we do not even need to be concerned about it. As a literary device it's message is very clear. On the other hand Abraham's willingness to give up his beloved son has to be literal or else it is ineffectual.

Mort questions my belief in Jesus. Read my signature! I have been touched by the Holy Spirit and consider that as a sheep I know my shepherd and he knows me. I trust in what he says through my intuition, but I also have reason. The relativity of the wisdom of his story compared to all other litery devices is so great that I find it impossible to believe that someone would have sufficient skill to write such a story being purely fictional. [i]God, the beginning and end of all things, can be known through the light of [b]human reason[/b] through created things![/i] (not intending to infer Jesus was created, just saying) Maybe I'm a sheep not of the fold, but still one of his sheep. Do you love me?

It's interesting the mention though of the loaves and fishes. I believe they filled some baskets with the leftovers. Where did the baskets come from? They were part of the miracle? Jesus knew before hand that he was going to perform the miracle and instructed the apostles to bring them? There was a typo, the correction would be that there was enough to fill the baskets but there weren't actually any baskets. Here we have plausible explanations for this problem and therefore it is still quite acceptable given the profoundness of his miracles. I believe by intuition, by logic and because... well I want to.


Actually I'm at a disadvantage in this discussion because I still don't know what you are proposing. Mort seems to be saying that NF was literal in every detail, but they got the time wrong. Does science need to prove something is not literal before we accept it as a parable, allegory whatever the correct word is?

edited for the usual spelling errors does anyone know how to make spell check work on PM?

Edited April 30, 2012 by Mark of the Cross

[mortify]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1335757420' post='2425077']
So are you saying that Noahs flood, ark and all that are literal but they got the dating wrong?[/quote]

That's basically what I'm saying. The old dating was based on the assumption that the genealogies mentioned in Genesis are all inclusive, however they're likely not. So when a genealogical list says person A is son of person B, "son" really means descendent, and there may be numerous links inbetween. And although I understand the account literally, I do so keeping in mind the scope of its genre.

[quote]Mass extinctions are evidenced as occurring quite regularly. Whenever I go to the national park I can see where ancient sea beds have been violently disrupted on a very regular basis. Uluru (Ayers rock) has even been turned at right angles. I don't have a problem with something more than a local fishermans tsunami. At some time in the future we are going to have a planetary mass extinction of grand proportions. I do have a problem with the ark story as told in the Bible. The concept of male and female of species allows for genetic diversity. The idea of re-population from a single pair doesn't seem feasible on the basis that inbreeding results in degeneration. In evolution we have numerous combinations from diversified breeding. The weak ones die out and the strong survive. Animal breeders take advantage of this by interbreeding with quality stock. With Noah's off-spring we are faced once again with the problem of inbreeding and incest[/quote]

The Bible does not reveal the details, but my personal speculation is that the diversification process was upped by God. In otherwords, a Divine act was responsible for the many positive mutations which would result in significant phenotypic changes in the offspring of the survivors, that would not been seen had it been a natural process. Thus, enough genetic diverity would have been generated from only a few people. This is not that hard to imagine, since the causes of mutations are not well known. It's presumed that many are random, but it can't be said that all are random. And although evolution is an entirely different topic, I think a Divine agent would be necessary to produce the so called "good mutations" to account for the impressive, and rapid development, of advanced life forms. So the idea of God producing a massive amoung of genetic diversity from a few survivors is not at all unbelievable.

[quote]Some other survivors? The ark was thousands of metres up a mountain at an altitude which is generally uninhabitable except by the experienced and equiped. Our ancestors were Yetis? After the water rapidly receded it would have been a very slippery decent down the mountain.
[/quote]

You're basing this on one speculated site of the ark. It's not actually known where it landed, and in all probably any evidence of it is long gone.

[mortify]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1335825824' post='2425388']
Mort questions my belief in Jesus <snip>
[/quote]

You has said some things that questioned the integrity of the Bible. I simply said you have some doubts that should be addressed. It's one thing to say the Bible proposes something that you have difficulty with understanding, and totally different thing to suggest it contains an error. That really amounts to a lack of faith, I'm sorry to say.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1335837963' post='2425483']
You has said some things that questioned the integrity of the Bible. I simply said you have some doubts that should be addressed. It's one thing to say the Bible proposes something that you have difficulty with understanding, and totally different thing to suggest it contains an error. That really amounts to a lack of faith, I'm sorry to say.
[/quote]
No, not just doubts. You questioned my belief in Christ.
[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1335501792' post='2423848']
Interesting Mark, so why do you believe in things like the Virgin Birth and [b]resurrection? Or do you? [/b]
[/quote]
I have never suggested biblical error or suggested that things did not occur. I have agreed in principle to a NF event. But just believing that an allegorical style of writing is the most logical explanation for the myriad of impossibilities and inconsistencies in parts of the Bible.
In the preface to Genesis in the Harper Collins study Bible there is the following quote.
[quote][b]Genesis is not a scientific or historical textbook in the modern sense[/b], (emphasised by capitals in the book) rather it is a narration of ancient Israel's traditions and concepts of the past- a mixture of myths and legends. [/quote]
From elsewhere I understand that myths and legends doesn't mean fiction just that they are stories used to tell a story.

I find your idea somewhat confusing. If you believe NF to be literal then it really follows that you must believe in a literal Genesis. Adam & Eve and creation in 6 days. Do you think the Church scholars have wasted their time studying scripture to obtain a deeper and more revealing meaning?

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1335837655' post='2425480']

You're basing this on one speculated site of the ark. It's not actually known where it landed, and in all probably any evidence of it is long gone.
[/quote]


Maybe I'm wrong but it is common belief that the ark came to rest at altitude on a high mountain.
[quote]
When Noah and the animals are safe on board, God sends the Flood, which rises until all the mountains are covered and all life on Earth is destroyed. At the height of the flood, the ark rests on mountaintops,
[/quote]

[cmotherofpirl]

The term land is more appropriate than the term earth, and ararat refers to a range of mountains in the OT, not a specific peak. So all the land in the area was covered, not the entire earth as we know it today. There are also two different stories intertwined in the final account, probably a mixing of the Northern and Southern kingdom versions.

[Laudate_Dominum]

I'll go with whatever Aloysius has to say on the matter.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1335895810' post='2425701']
I'll go with whatever Aloysius has to say on the matter.
[/quote]
That's what she said!

[Mark of the Cross]

BTW what did Aloysius say?


[quote name='cmotherofpirl' timestamp='1335883911' post='2425639']
The term land is more appropriate than the term earth, and ararat refers to a range of mountains in the OT, not a specific peak. So all the land in the area was covered, not the entire earth as we know it today. [b]There are also two different stories intertwined in the final account, probably a mixing of the Northern and Southern kingdom versions.[/b]
[/quote]
Interesting 2 accounts. Are they both literal?
The DR Bible quotes 2 by 2. I read that the other version is a priestly construct whatever that means. Appearently for the sacrifice after the flood. But as I replied to 'Miss Scripture I not able to comment on that.'


[quote]
Douay-Rheims Bible
And [b]all flesh was destroyed that moved upon the earth,[/b] both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beasts, and of all creeping things that creep upon the earth: [b]and all men.[/b] [url="http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=1&ch=7&l=22#x"][22][/url] And all things wherein there is the breath of [b]life on the earth, died.[/b] [url="http://www.drbo.org/x/d?b=drb&bk=1&ch=7&l=23#x"][23][/url] And he destroyed all the substance that was upon the earth, from man even to beast, and the creeping things and fowls of the air: and they were destroyed from the earth: [b]and Noe only remained, and they that were with him in the ark.[/b]

[/quote]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1335634307' post='2424394']
Did you read the original post? Noah's flood was anthropologically global, it need not have been geographically global. Theres a big difference there. If the flood was early enough in human history, ie when humans were confined to one continent and the entire population was in the millions, you already avoid many of the so called classic problems.
[/quote]
Seems to me to be some inconsistencies here in these quotes which I find puzzling.

BTW I'm not purporting to know how literal or allegorical Genesis is, just that it is a mixture of both. So far people here seem to be producing non literal evidence to support the argument of literalness. Stop it! You're confusing the Spock out of me.

[mortify]

[quote name='Mark of the Cross' timestamp='1335846710' post='2425531']
I have never suggested biblical error or suggested that things did not occur. [/quote]

In post #36 you said,

[color=#0000FF]"Some people even suggest that the Holywood version of exodus is an exagerated colourful version. Why would people still doubt and revert to pagan gods after seeing the events of exodus as told in the Bible, literal version."[/color]

Perhaps you did not intend it, but the above does suggest you question whether the golden calf event recorded in the Bible.

[quote]I have agreed in principle to a NF event. But just believing that an allegorical style of writing is the most logical explanation for the myriad of impossibilities and inconsistencies in parts of the Bible.[/quote]

There is an event in human history that reduced humanity to about two thousand, perhaps even a lot less. There is one unanimous tale told world wide about a near extinction in human history, and that event involves a global flood. It seems to me there is a connection between the two, but further research is still necessary.

What is your view on the Flood, exactly?

[quote]I find your idea somewhat confusing. If you believe NF to be literal then it really follows that you must believe in a literal Genesis. Adam & Eve and creation in 6 days. Do you think the Church scholars have wasted their time studying scripture to obtain a deeper and more revealing meaning?
[/quote]

There are mutliple levels in Scripture. What is at the surface does not contradict what is at the depth. So there is no contradiction in Tradition interpreting these events as historical, and still extracting an allegorical lesson that can be applied to our own lives, in a subjective way.

With regards to Genesis, yes, I regard it as literal, but I have to qualify what I mean by "literal." Genesis was written prior to the modern notion of history, and so it can't be read by this. Many times the Divine Author disregards details that a contemporary historian would find valuable, because the intent is spiritual, and not historical. It may very well be that "days" in Genesis is referring to epochs of time, or perhaps they are 24 hour days, the reality is with God either is possible, and niether is more difficult for Him than the other.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='mortify' timestamp='1335925443' post='2425899']
In post #36 you said,

[color=#0000FF]"Some people even suggest that the Holywood version of exodus is an exagerated colourful version. Why would people still doubt and [u]revert to pagan gods[/u] after seeing the events of exodus as told in the Bible, literal version."[/color]

Perhaps you did not intend it, but the above does suggest you question whether the golden calf event recorded in the Bible.

[/quote]
I don't understand, I believe the underlined referred to such an event! People made a golden calf and worshipped it. This means the miracles they observed were not enough to convince them that they were in fact miracles. Or it could just be that they did not want God's law and defied him for the purpose of continuing on their sinful ways. Suggesting that a scriptural event has been described in the Bible by the use of an allegorical overlay is not to suggest that it is in error or in any way untrue. God undoubtably has purpose for such puzzles.

[quote]There is an event in human history that reduced humanity to about two thousand, perhaps even a lot less. There is one unanimous tale told world wide about a near extinction in human history, and that event involves a global flood. It seems to me there is a connection between the two, but further research is still necessary.[/quote]

Undoubtedly! But your figure of about 2k is in conflict with the Biblical version. Refer to my previous Genesis quote.

[quote]What is your view on the Flood, exactly?[/quote]
Some event occurred such as the ones that have regularly occurred throughout earths history. Only this particular mass extinction had divine purpose and intervention. I have no way of knowing the exact mechanism. I'll leave that to the theologians that have spent many years studying the available scientific data.



[quote]There are mutliple levels in Scripture. What is at the surface does not contradict what is at the depth. So there is no contradiction in Tradition [u]interpreting these events as historical[/u], and still extracting an allegorical lesson that can be applied to our own lives, in a subjective way.[/quote]
You haven't addressed the quote from the study Bible. Here it is again.

[quote]
In the preface to Genesis in the Harper Collins study Bible there is the following quote.
Quote

[b]Genesis [u]is not a scientific or historical[/u] textbook in the modern sense[/b], (emphasised by capitals in the book) rather it is a narration of ancient Israel's traditions and concepts of the past- [u]a mixture of myths and legends.[/u]

[/quote]
Myths and legends not to be confused in meaning with fiction, but a method of relating information by the use of a colourful story.

[quote]With regards to Genesis, yes, I regard it as literal, but I have to qualify what I mean by "literal." Genesis was written prior to the modern notion of history, and so it can't be read by this. Many times the Divine Author disregards details that a contemporary historian would find valuable, because the intent is spiritual, and not historical. It may very well be that "days" in Genesis is referring to epochs of time, or perhaps they are 24 hour days, the reality is with God either is possible, and niether is more difficult for Him than the other.[/quote]
How come you can see allegorical time representations, but not in other events.
Seems to me that this is saying that the intended audience of that time were not sufficiently educated to understand science in the way we do. And so the appearance of the literal story being like a children's story is simply just because of that. The people had a simplistic knowledge and needed a simplistic description and also that was the way in which people wrote. Even in Jesus time story tellers including Jesus himself relied heavily on parables. The Bible (God) and even as Jesus himself often gave us some real enigmas as well to which no one seems to know the answer. Maybe God's intention is for us to have such discussions? (Where two or more are gathered in my name, there am I.) At mass we read scripture here we are studying it. Bible study is a kind of prayer??

Edited May 2, 2012 by Mark of the Cross