College and seminary professors, pastors, and Ph.Ds: “If a serpent skin wrapped around the arm of a godly Bible character doesn’t set off any alarms… I don’t know what to say.”
College and seminary professors, pastors, and Ph.Ds: “If a serpent skin wrapped around the arm of a godly Bible character doesn’t set off any alarms… I don’t know what to say.”
Its a movie where Noah saves his family and a bunch of animals from God, who’s all cranky because people are mean to The Environment. Real Biblical, uh huh.
That was just the trailer. Then I saw a pic of the director. Hipster dweeb! I’m skipping it. My blood pressure doesn’t need a workout.
Thanks for that link, Kate. That was really interesting. Explains a lot.
Didn’t see the movie yet and now I don’t plan to.
This is not surprising. When has the film industry, especially Hollywood, been on the side of Good? Evil has more appeal to them. Some ‘stars’ even brag of selling their souls to the devil. I knew that Madonna was linked to Kabbalah but didn’t know what it represented. Today’s Hollywood is all about narcissism. Money. Power.
I have been looking for a reason to mention something in this place for a while now. Possibly this is the time. There are very few web places where what follows will be actually read and maybe commented on. Either asking for clarification or at least W.T.F. are you talking about old man.
Here goes; I have been entertaining myself with a series of lectures from the “The Teaching Course” and the latest set is “Big History”. This is a presentation of the present theories explaining how the Big Bang created human existence.
The lecturer has serious credentials and is competent in the appropriate sense of “this what We now believe” with empirical information to form an opinion. This information from the micro second after the Big Bang until the eighteenth century is given with the slight humour of the Academic, not really condescending, but you know the mystery of Science has just been lifted a bit at the corner. You have been permitted inside.
However when we have been brought forward 13 and half billion years through the formation of atoms; elements; stars; planets; gases; liquids; solids; living things both vegetable and animal, the presentation becomes a bit strained. The We really do not know what happened in the micro seconds immediately after the Big Bang and this is the most plausible understanding of the facts as we know them to a definite “this is the truth” manner of expression.
The difference? The lecturer is starting to talk about Darwinism. Not Charles Darwin’s Grandfather’s understanding of Darwinism or Lamarckism, which Grandfather and Charles Darwin himself came to believe of Lamarck’s theory, but the Survival of the Fittest with the progressive certainty what We, of Science, know is Darwinism is how humans were developed.
Just a bit of less confidence in the lecturer’s voice to reveal he has deliberately moved beyond the “we do not absolutely know everything” evident in the information going back 13 and half billion years ago, but we certainly know there is not a creator.
Whether there is a creator or not is neither the question or answer. My problem is it even possible the Scientists may be mistaken? Can it possibly be there is something or someone in a white lab coat who does not care anything about the mice of which he/she/they are gathering empirical data does exist?
That’s it! It is just a tip of my iceberg of disbelieve in anything expressed in the fields of Academia and Social Science as being nothing but Sly-ience. A retreat from integrity now increasingly evident in the world built by the Baby Boomer generation. Cheers;
From a historical point of view…
The original flood story is found in Sumerian texts, circa 4000 to 3000 BC, and then passed down through subsequent civilizations, most notably the Assyrians and Babylonians. See “Utnapishtm” and “Gilgamesh”. In 597 BC Nebuchadnezzar II destroyed Jerusalem, taking very many of its prominent citizens, including priests, back to Babylon. Some 70 years later they, or their descendants, were released and sent back home.
It is likely that during this captivity is when Hebrews were schooled in the afore mentioned traditions, and thus did affect to some degree their own sense of history and/or religion. There is some agreement that the Pentateuch was first transcribed by Hebrews circa 450 BC.
Sumerian written lore centered around the primary gods, En-Lil and En-Ki, is pretty fascinating stuff. And it doesn’t take much imagination to see its influence on the Book of Genesis…which, taken literally, is all about “gods” in the specifically plural sense of the word.
Gnosis: Greek, meaning “knowledge”.
How does the theory of Survival of the Fittest line up with ‘progressive’ policies such as Affirmative Action, breakfasts provided for school kids, Insite and crack pipe vending machines in Vancouver’s poorest and most degenerate neighbourhood, handing out good grades for substandard academic results, eschewing competition, and the idea of taking from the rich and giving to the poor?
Seems to me that Climate Alarmists only accept the scientific results that work for them.
BTW, did the Big Bang beget our baby boomers? 🙂
Point needs to be made that Mr. Aronofsky is cr@pping all over the Gnosticism and the Kaballah as much as he is on Christianity, by using those traditions as a bat to beat up Christianity.
He doesn’t believe -any- of it, he’s not really interested in any of it, except as a weapon to hurt people he dislikes.
That would be -us-, my friends. He’s trying to hurt -us-. And make us pay money as well.
He’s like Tarantino, who having offended against Christianity and Western culture as much as his limited brain possibly could in movie after movie, branched out into offending against Japanese and Chinese as well. Aronofsky long ago declared war on our entire culture, and he’s been sniping away ever since.
I for one am not paying to see his movie. I didn’t pay to see Avatar either, same reason. It’ll be on Netflix soon enough I’m sure, and I’ll ignore it there too.
Walt Disney has competition??
I think you have it Chutz. I am now changing SNAFU to SNAFBB; Cheers;
All covered in the text “The Gnostic Gospels” by Elaine Pagels
http://www.amazon.ca/The-Gnostic-Gospels-Elaine-Pagels/dp/0679724532
Vintage Books, New York: 1979
The 52 texts discovered in Nag Hammadi, Egypt include ‘secret’ gospels poems and myths attributing to Jesus sayings and beliefs which are very different from the New Testament.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/religion/story/pagels.html
All the Gnostic texts were didn’t make it into what is known as today’s Bible for the very reasons the Church Fathers gave then; Gnostics believed that matter, whether it be the physical universe or the humanly body, is evil. It is obvious that there is a great tension between spirit and matter. This effects many of their beliefs and especially the way they perceive(d) the world and God’s interactions with it.
Thus to escape and shed the material physical world was deemed ‘salvation’…
This heretical view is still in existence today, both in various secretive cults and in such pop religious movements as astrology or alchemy, claiming to have ‘secret knowledge’.
The Masonic movement has been referred to as a Gnostic movement. The popular book The Da Vinci Code (2003, Doubleday) by Dan Brown promotes Gnostic ideas as it attempts to undermine orthodox Christianity.
Aronofsky’s Noah seems to be a Gnostic ‘retread’ on the Old Testament story judging by the review.
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
“There is some agreement that the Pentateuch was first transcribed by Hebrews circa 450 BC.”
I don’t agree with that date. Most Bible scholars place the writing of the first five books written by Moses at around 1450 to 1400 B.C.
The best lies have many elements of the truth.
For example, the Old Testament quote that Satan twisted;
Mat 4:6 And saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written, He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: and in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
Quoted from Psa 91:11 For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
And Psa 91:12 They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.
He omitted ‘to keep thee in all thy ways’ and added, ‘at at any time’.
It is likely that during this captivity is when Hebrews were schooled in the afore mentioned traditions, and thus did affect to some degree their own sense of history and/or religion. There is some agreement that the Pentateuch was first transcribed by Hebrews circa 450 BC.
Nonsense, the Code of Amraphel (Khammurabi) is at complete odds with the Laws of Moses.
As examples;
Offense Punishment by Jehovah’s Law.
Stealing. Restoring double (Exo_22:9).
Burglary. Restoring double (Exo_22:7).
Harboring a fugitive slave. No offense (Deu_23:15).
Injuring a slave. Freedom given to slave.
Injuring a rich man. Same injury inflicted on injurer.
Injuring a poor man. Same injury inflicted (Exo_21:23-25).
Injury followed by death to a rich man’s daughter. Each case judged on its own merits.
Injury followed by death to a poor man’s daughter. Each case judged on its own merits.
Punishment by Khammurabi’s Law.
Stealing. Death (§ 4).
Burglary. Death (§ 21).
Harboring a fugitive slave. Death (§ 16).
Injuring a slave. Master compensated (§ 99)
Injuring a rich man. Same injury inflicted on injurer (§§ 196, 197).
Injuring a poor man. Fine of one mina of silver (§ 198).
Injury followed by death to a rich man’s daughter. Death of injurer’s daughter (§ 209).
Injury followed by death to a poor man’s daughter. Fine of 5 shekels of silver (§§ 211, 213).
For reference only, because it approximates what I’ve read in my own research…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentateuch
Indeed, aside from the Bible, there’s no actual proof of even the existence of Moses.
On the other hand, there’s some highly intriguing research into whom he may actually have been, including the theory that he may have been Pharaoh Akhenaten, (formerly Amenhotep IV), who introduced monotheism to Egypt, and ultimately whom great effort was taken to expunge from the Egyptian historical records.
FWIW
Poifect!:)
You’re talking about Hebrew laws.
I’m talking about the history of creation and pre-flood times as related in Genesis. Two different things.
Forensic textual criticism is little more than a crap shoot when it comes to speculation about authors, redactors and the time and influence of each. The favorite section of the Bible to preform such forensics is the Pentateuch. I personally don’t put a lot of credence in the sayings of said critics because theirs is a field of ambiguity. How many times has the events or places recorded in the Pentateuch been denied then verified as being real. Personally I believe the oldest parts of the Bible were recorded by the Patriarchs and carried with the family until the Hebrews moved to Egypt. Whereupon Joseph had them stored in the Royal Library. Hundreds of years later a young Hebrew/Egyptian prince named Moses discovered the ancient texts in the library he had access to and put them into a condensed version we have come to know as the book of Genesis.
Back on topic although I won’t be going to see the movie because I don’t like theatres or the acting, I suspect that even if the intent of the movie was to discredit Christianity the long term effect will be the opposite.
It is an allegation of the “Higher” Criticism (which dispenses with documentary or MS. evidence, and therefore differs altogether from “Textual” Criticism) that the five books known as the Pentateuch were not written by, or during the time of Moses, but in the time of a king Manasseh, or even as late as Ezra.
But a definite “book” is spoken of throughout the Old Testament as being constantly written in, with directions how it was to be added to and kept up by the prophets raised up from time to time for that purpose, among others.
The first occurrence is in Exo_17:14. To this, in the margin, all the others are referred back. They are given below, so that the chain may be examined link by link and its completeness and perfection seen.
More – http://www.levendwater.org/companion/append47.html
I did notice one thing in the Noah preview – they got the fountains of the deep right. They were spouting everywhere out of the ground. Remember a while back we discussed the underground oceans? Well here they are again.
You say “Noah” and I think Bill Cosby. That has to be the funniest routine ever.
I think everyone is reading too much out of this movie for several reasons. It’s from Hollywood. The big money behind it comes from atheists. Controversy sells tickets. Lots of controversy sells more tickets. Did I mention it’s made in Hollywood ? I would not be surprised if the next film coming out of there would be about Jesus and would show him as being a gay foam at the mouth tree hugger who died to save the planet from some environmental cause. That’s Hollywood.
I’m going to park my brain and see the movie when it finally shows up on the movie channel sometime next year. I like Russel Crowe and will marvel at the special effects knowing full well that the story will be drenched in so much bullshit that the 5 minutes of actual research that was done will elude me completely. That’s all I expect from Hollywood.
I’m not sure Christian knowledge need be all that dense, considering that most of her adherents are the poor and ignorant,the simple and the pure. Anyhoo, I won’t be seeing this garbage, and Charlton Heston is better at playing biblical characters and likely would have refused this version.
Did anyone actually expect this movie to follow the Bible?
Anyway, I like what my pastor said “he saw the movie, but thought the book was better.”
peter peter..”””The big money behind it comes from atheists”””
yes Joos can be atheists, and Aronofsky is a Joo
Like I said, it’s typical Hollywood and if you go by audience reaction there’s not much there that will upset Christians. About as realistic and valid as A Inconvenient Truth that sparked a whole new religion, except it has better special effects.
https://twitter.com/DarrenAronofsky
I noticed there’s very little hate mail.
It shouldn’t surprise anyone that if Hollywood catches religion, it’s usually heretical. Naturally, it would be Gnosticism – in which the followers are just a little smarter than everyone else, and privy to secret, revealed knowledge that is only available to the elect. It’s the ultimate ego trip, and the few folks that I encountered who were mixed up with this kind of stuff tended to be narcissistic, boastful, secretive, paranoic – and dumb.
It wasn’t until I met modern-day Gnostics that I understood how seductive, and evil that thinking is. And it’s only recently that I’ve actually understood the creed of St. Athanasius, or that particularly emphatic beginning to the Nicene creed. They were written specifically to combat the kind of thinking expressed in the movie Noah, because the writers of those creeds felt that Gnostic thinking has a particularly dangerous and harmful outcome.
Every time I read about religious/non-religious views I think of a conversation from a few years back between myself and an elderly Jehovah’s Witness lady who approached me in my driveway as my two small children played road hockey on the driveway…
Me: Good morning.
Jehovah’s Witness: Good morning. Do you have a moment?
Me: Absolutely.
JW: I was wondering if I could share with you a few pieces of literature…
Me: No thank you.
JW: It will only take a moment of your time.
ME: No, thank you. I know it costs your organization money to put together the literature and I wouldn’t feel right taking it from you only to put it in my recycling bin when I go inside.
JW: Oh… so you don’t share your life with the lord?
Me: No, I’m an atheist.
JW: Oh… can I ask why have you chosen this path? Do you not want to go to Heaven?
Me: I want to be the best person I can be here on Earth. And I’ve realized you don’t need to be a religious person to be a good person. And you don’t need to be a good person to be a religious person.
JW: But what about them? (pointing to my two small sons paying road hockey)
ME: I’m not sure what they believe. I’ll let them decide for themselves. 🙂
JW: But don’t you want them to know the lord?
ME: I want them to be good people.
JW: Well, thank you for your time.
ME: My pleasure. Have a great day!
I’m endlessly amused by interactions (my own, and the SDA comments section included) between believers and non-believers. Confusion, shock, persuasion… passive aggression masked as “helping” (ie. quoting verses, pointing out inconsistencies, listing consequences)… even outright anger, name-calling and threats. If you need religion as your “reason” to be a good person, that’s up to you. If you don’t need religion to be a good person, that’s also up to you. Just be a good person. Is that naive? Perhaps. Simple? Most of the time. Effective? For me, yes.
So where are the PC police when you need them, I didn’t hear that the movie contained any gay animal couples?
Sort of a Brokeback Mountain theme to include everyone, no?
And it helps that the definition of ‘good’ is so subjective, right? 🙂
Makes it a lot easier to be ‘good’…
Just a guy >
Commenting as agnostic I find your certainty that there is no higher consciousness in the Universe, or beyond a limited perspective.
Regardless it’s interesting that true Atheists don’t seem to value the idea that without authority beyond themselves or “The State” they have no “god given inalienable rights” to be respected, other than that granted to them by the State.
I suppose in our current western culture there is still enough “believers” with earthly power, to maintain the status quo for everyone else, at least until there is a full Atheist conversion to the unaccountable intelligentsia that reduces humanity to lumps of blood and puss.
Guess I’m one of those who has read too much. I’m often reminded of that famous movie line delivered by Jack Nicholson: “You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth!”
There’s a fine line between religion and ideology, and we don’t have to look to far in this world to find evidence of such…not the least example of which is this global warming/climate change crap.
Mythology plays a major part in both. And both too often demand twisting realities (such as human nature) into knots in order to fit within the always limited confines of an “ism”. Both drive people to want to make other people conform to their ideals, if no other reason than some sort of confirmation of legitimacy…all too frequently with an “or else” attached.
Remember that it’s generally the winners who write the history books. Knowing this, I’ve always been interested in what the rest might have to say.
FWIW.
Al in Cranbrook >
“…..limited confines of an “ism”. Both drive people to want to make other people conform to their ideals”
Which is precisely why I view the “force our special beliefs down your throat” cult of Atheism as nothing especially different than the rest of them.
Knight…
Yep, Atheism can be preached for its own sake, just like anything else, and as such, also requires varying degrees of denial of realities. And its adherents…perhaps even more than others…also seek confirmation of legitimacy of their beliefs (an attribute of human nature).
History since its earliest recording is replete with the wreckage of people beating each other to death over religion/ideology…and any open minded investigation will demonstrate that Christianity certainly is no exception to this sad truth.
It is my thinking that it is wisdom that is eternal, and above all of it.
Touche… 🙂
Al in Cranbrook >
Absolutely.
As such, we live in a real world of isms and religiosity in one form or another, to one degree or another. So I’ll pick my poisons based on logic.
Meaning, given a choice between our “ruling classes “ or “National Identity” who generally adhere to one religion or another, such as Islam verses Christianity verses Atheism, etcetera, I’ll stick with modern Christianity with it’s foundational tolerance, and inclusive values which helped mold the fairest laws and constitutional guidelines we still try to enjoy today .
If only for self-preservation.
Knight…
There is so much interesting stuff to learn about. If I had one wish for whatever I could conceive, it might be for a time machine that would take me back to see what actually happened. I’m convinced little of it would resemble what we’ve been told.
And even at that, I wonder that knowing all of that would make a difference anyway.
Cheers!
🙂
You seem to have the need to cover a widely varied group with a tiny label just to be able to try and understand them. There is no one kind of atheist just like there is no one kind of agnostic or one kind of person who enjoys chocolate or one kind of person who doesn’t believe in flying saucers or fairies. Also, please kindly show us all where Just a Guy declared the existence of a god a certain impossibility. You can’t, simply because he didn’t.
Cripes man, even Christians alone come in thousands of versions and levels of faith. And they all have a detailed book to follow.
If you want to judge ALL atheists because of an active few you see on the web, that is your folly. I spent 20 years as an agnostic, something I eventually figured, for me anyways, was the residue of the standard guilt-inducing Catholic childhood I had. Shedding myself of the remaining superstitious BS was a natural next step. Some so-called atheists I have talked to turn actually turn out to be agnostic. They just can’t give up the dream of heaven as it is a powerful lure.
You also seem to think that part of not believing in any god is denying that one could ever possibly exist. No one can or probably ever will be able to prove this. So how could any free-thinking individual make any such conclusion?
Fellow non-believers I talk to generally agree that there is simply zero evidence at this time to believe in a creationist god who is active in people’s daily lives, answering prayers, curing disease, etc. That’s it, nothing more. Uncomplicated, n’est pas?
Please educate yourself before commenting further on a growing portion of society you clearly understand little about.
BTW, how are things over at the Agnostic Cult?
Canadian Observer >
“You seem to have the need to cover a widely varied group with a tiny label just to be able to try and understand them.” – Canadian Observer
Mmmmmm, no I don’t.
“If you want to judge ALL atheists because….” – Canadian Observer
Judge ALL? Better reread.
“Please educate yourself before commenting further on a growing portion of society you clearly understand little about.” – Canadian Observer
Thanks for the sermon, er really.
Al in Cranbrook >
“If I had one wish…..it might be for a time machine that would take me back….”
Hear, Hear!
Cheers,