No, the Deluge was not a local flood. It was universal!

Today, I stumbled on a Catholic site that had a rather lengthy article arguing against the universality of the Deluge (Flood of Noah). It says many things, but after reading it, might I proffer my reader to read a Catholic defence of the traditional teaching of the Church by the Kolbe Center. 

The locality of the Deluge raises some important (and common sense) questions:

1. If the Flood was local, why didn't God just tell Noah to vacate the vicinity until the flood had abated?
2. Why did God command Noah to spend a hundred years building a massive Ark to contain all the world's animals, if the flood was local?
3. If the flood was local, then God lied, did He not, when He promised in Gen. 9:11 to never again send another Flood upon the earth? There have been countless floods since Noah's day! 
4. Was Jesus Christ confused when He contrasted the Deluge with the Second Coming (Luke 17:26-27)? He said that in the end times, men will be as wicked as in the days of Noah. Well, Genesis tells us that ALL flesh was corrupt. But, if by all we are to interpret just a local area, then that means that the whole world won't be wicked at the coming of the Son of Man.
5. Was Jesus Christ, Truth itself, lying when in Luke 17:27 He said the Flood destroyed ALL men?
6. If the Flood was local, then wasn't God a complete idiot for not telling Noah to move, and instead commissioned him to spend a hundred years pointlessly building a huge boat?
7. When the Church Fathers unanimously agreed that the Deluge was universal, were they lying or deceiving the Church?
8. Was the Church teaching error when She taught that the Deluge was universal?
9. Is every single civilisation in error since they all believed in a universal flooding of the earth?

   
As the Kolbe article points out, there are clams found atop the Himalayan mountains. How did they get there? Clams don't have limbs, and they live in water. So, unless someone carried them up, I think the only logical explanation is that the mountains were, at some point, under water. And, before anyone says "but they are the largest mountains in the world, and the Flood couldn't have reached that high", take note of this article that explains how Mt Everest and other high mountains were once under water. 

Another point to be made is that empirical evidence can be misinterpreted as well. For example, there have been numerous times when scientists have supposedly found the "missing link" in human evolution, only for their "missing link" to be proven false. Call me simple-minded, a scientific luddite, or whatever, but I have always found that following the teaching of the Church on these matters really helps, especially following the sound rule of St. Augustine: accept Scripture as it is literally written, except where reason dictates otherwise. So, I accept the universality of the Deluge because that is what Scripture says, and there is no reason to doubt it, especially in light of the questions above and the evidence presented. 

Thus far, I have never found that I had to change my views once I had accepted the rule of St. Augustine, whether it pertains to the universality of the Flood, the young age of the earth or anything else. I accept what the Scriptures teach, within reason obviously, and God kindly furnishes proof for my believing in what He has spoken in Scripture. And I never have to perform mental gymnastics in order to stretch my beliefs, since they come straight from the Divine Wisdom Himself.

So, if that makes me a fool, then so be it. I shall be known as the Fool of God!