AuthorTopic: Movie review: Noah  (Read 14303 times)

Offline jdwheeler42

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3339
    • View Profile
    • Going Upslope
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #15 on: March 31, 2014, 07:39:00 PM »
I wonder how much of it is based on the worldwide rise in sea level corresponding to the melting of the glaciers 12,000 years ago....
I think that happened too slowly for people to see it as a flood.
and certainly wasn't enough to put the Ark on Mt Ararat.
Well, of course not, MKing, that is one of those silly little details that is pretty unique to the Hebrew version....

Now as to the question of being too slow...

Look at #7.... that's about 10 degrees Celsius warming in about 10 years.... maybe not quite as abrupt as 40 days and 40 nights, but certainly rapid enough to be scary to people living through it.
Making pigs fly is easy... that is, of course, after you have built the catapult....

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #16 on: April 01, 2014, 04:27:50 AM »
Quote from: Ashvin
Because 90% of white fundies are... racist?

That's weird, because the Gospels placed no importance on the race or physical features of Jesus (or anyone else), and, more importantly, the early Christians were the FIRST to denounce racism in an extremely racist culture.

As you know well, the practices of the early Church bear NO resemblance to the practices of the current crop of white fundamentalist Christian Americans. Many such churches become defenders of orthodoxy and form that resembles nothing so much as the Pharisees of Jesus' time.

When it comes to accusations of racism, I know no such thing. Maybe 10% of white Christians who consider themselves conservative, fundamentalist, evangelical, whatever are also racist. Probably less than 10% and therefore nowhere near 90%.

And Billy Graham was such a racist that he bailed MLK Jr. out of jail...

(Also, defending the orthodoxy that Jesus preached cannot resemble the Pharisees of Jesus' time... that much should be obvious)
« Last Edit: April 01, 2014, 04:58:06 AM by Ashvin »

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 42050
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #17 on: April 01, 2014, 04:33:33 AM »

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #18 on: April 01, 2014, 04:43:22 AM »
I have to wonder if the Sumerians and Babylonians also got their noses out of joint and complained about the upstart Hebrews culturally misappropriating their story? 

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/gilgamesh.html
"The first striking thing that one notices when reading the Epic of Gilgamesh is how silly the story is. Part of the silliness is because of the obviously human-like behavior of the gods. They are constantly fighting amongst each other, plotting and deceiving each other. One would expect this part of the story to be removed from a Genesis copy. Therefore, we would expect that the Genesis account would be changed to involve some kind of judgment, since Yahweh (God) does not capriciously destroy humans, as was done in the Gilgamesh epic. It would, therefore, make sense that Noah would be chosen for his righteousness although Utnapishtim was chosen for no apparent reason.

Even with these major changes not considered, there are many dissimilarities that would not be expected from a story copied from another story. For example, the timings of the flood accounts are vastly different. The Gilgamesh flood took only 3 weeks, whereas the Genesis flood lasted over a year. The Gilgamesh flood included several 7 day long events. This "perfect" number is found throughout the Bible, so would be expected to be retained if copied from the epic of Gilgamesh. However, the Bible uses numbers like 40 and 150 - much longer timeframes.

The boats in the two accounts are quite different. The Gilgamesh boat was an unseaworthy cube with a slate roof. Obviously, such a design would immediately flip over or roll around in the water. In contrast, the ark had dimensions that were ideal for a seaworthy ship. This fact might be surprising, since both cultures were not noted for their nautical skills. It is obvious that the gods of the Sumerians had no expertise in shipbuilding."

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #19 on: April 01, 2014, 04:53:14 AM »
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/localflood.html

Does the Genesis text indicate that the flood was local? If you read it carefully, you can determine that the perspective is local. Most English translations are actually interpretations that are intentionally skewed to favor a global flood interpretation. For example, Genesis 7:20 is usually translated as:

The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. (Genesis 7:20)

In reality, the Hebrew word ma‛al, translated "higher" really means "upward." So, in essence, the text is saying that the flood was 15 cubits (20 feet) deep, in total, not 15 cubits above the mountains. In addition, the Hebrew word har really refers most often to hills rather than mountains. See below.

The translators of most English Bibles use the word "earth," which to us means "planet earth." However, their mistranslation can clearly be seen in the following passage:

Gen 8:5 And the water decreased steadily until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains became visible.

Gen 8:6 Then it came about at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made;

Gen 8:7 and he sent out a raven, and it flew here and there until the water was dried up from the earth.

Gen 8:8 Then he sent out a dove from him, to see if the water was abated from the face of the land;

Gen 8:9 but the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, so she returned to him into the ark; for the water was on the surface of all the earth. Then he put out his hand and took her, and brought her into the ark to himself.

We see that in the tenth month, the mountains became visible to Noah (Genesis 8:5). Some 40+ days later (Genesis 8:6), Noah sent a dove out of the ark (Genesis 8:8). However, the dove was unable to land because of all the water (Genesis 8:9). Then, the text tells us that water was "on the surface of all the earth." This is obviously a bad translation of kol erets, since we know that the water had not covered the mountains for at least 40 days. The context makes it clear that kol erets must refer to local geography and should be translated as the "all the land" or "all the ground." In fact, all our major English translations (NASB, NIV, KJV, etc.) make this same error. It is no wonder that people who read the English translation of the Bible "literally" come to the conclusion that the flood must have been global. However, it is apparent that our English "translations" of the Genesis flood text are more than just "translations," but actually interpretations (and probably incorrect ones at that).

There is another indication in the text that the flood did not cover the highest mountains. Again, from Genesis 8:

So he waited yet another seven days; and again he sent out the dove from the ark. And the dove came to him toward evening; and behold, in her beak was a freshly picked olive leaf. So Noah knew that the water was abated from the earth. (Genesis 8:10-11)

If the ark had come to rest on the top of Mount Ararat, this would be at 17,000 foot elevation. Olive trees (and every other tree) do not grow at 17,000 feet. In fact, you will not find olive trees growing much above 5,000 feet. Therefore, we know from the Bible that the ark did not come to rest on or near the top of Mount Ararat, but probably somewhere on the foothills of the mountain.

Offline MKing

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #20 on: April 01, 2014, 06:53:17 AM »
Well, of course not, MKing, that is one of those silly little details that is pretty unique to the Hebrew version....

No, more likely unique to modern day conspiracy/religious fanatics. Hell I remember this stuff on the telly when I was a kid....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCCeb4NgTQA

Quote from: jdwheeler42

Look at #7.... that's about 10 degrees Celsius warming in about 10 years.... maybe not quite as abrupt as 40 days and 40 nights, but certainly rapid enough to be scary to people living through it.

Shit! Where did all this most warming in 100,000 years nonsense go!! DENIER!!!!! How dare you present evidence contradicting the story the IPCC wants trumpeted from the rooftops! Comply or be cast out!!
Sometimes one creates a dynamic impression by saying something, and sometimes one creates as significant an impression by remaining silent.
-Dalai Lama

Offline jdwheeler42

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3339
    • View Profile
    • Going Upslope
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #21 on: April 01, 2014, 07:23:22 AM »
Well, of course not, MKing, that is one of those silly little details that is pretty unique to the Hebrew version....
No, more likely unique to modern day conspiracy/religious fanatics. Hell I remember this stuff on the telly when I was a kid....
Touche'!
Quote
Quote from: jdwheeler42
Look at #7.... that's about 10 degrees Celsius warming in about 10 years.... maybe not quite as abrupt as 40 days and 40 nights, but certainly rapid enough to be scary to people living through it.
Shit! Where did all this most warming in 100,000 years nonsense go!! DENIER!!!!! How dare you present evidence contradicting the story the IPCC wants trumpeted from the rooftops! Comply or be cast out!!
LOL... I didn't quote it, but I actually got the 10 degrees in 10 years from the IPCC site.  That hyperbole is not from the IPCC.  However, if you'll look closely at the graph, you'll see how very flat the past few centuries are.  Industrial civilization has been spoiled with an even climate.  NTHE is way off base, but we are in for a lot of pain compared to what we've grown accustomed to.
Making pigs fly is easy... that is, of course, after you have built the catapult....

Offline Petty Tyrant

  • Cannot be Saved
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 4573
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #22 on: April 01, 2014, 09:04:12 AM »

(Also, defending the orthodoxy that Jesus preached cannot resemble the Pharisees of Jesus' time... that much should be obvious)

Jesus could not have philosophised with the pharisees in the sanhedrin if he was not of a rabinnical line and the lineage to David is fully set out in the bible. Also if you look at the picture RE posted, you see JC depicted wearing a beard, as someone of the rabinnical line would have been expected. He wasnt wearing the Bee Gee's Jebus look just for the hell of it. Furthermore, as depicted in the image RE posted note the swarthiness. His travels all over the then known world as far as greece and back over many months were walked, which he could not have done with melanoma prone skin tone. He was undoubtedly a darky.
ELEVATE YOUR GAME

Offline MKing

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #23 on: April 01, 2014, 09:27:23 AM »
When it comes to accusations of racism, I know no such thing.

Yeah, I guess the history of it isn't as well taught in schools as it once was, that people don't know of it?



Quote from: Ashvin

And Billy Graham was such a racist that he bailed MLK Jr. out of jail...

Certainly I didn't say Billy Graham was racist, just that he wouldn't recognize the second coming if it was a black child born in Africa any better than he did that of David Koresh.

Picking and choosing among those claiming to be the return of Christ can be awful tricky I imagine.

Quote from: Ashvin
(Also, defending the orthodoxy that Jesus preached cannot resemble the Pharisees of Jesus' time... that much should be obvious)

It's all religious stuff, none of it is obvious, all of it is relative, it all trends towards fascism, and it can't be trusted any more than any other type of fear based social control system.



Sometimes one creates a dynamic impression by saying something, and sometimes one creates as significant an impression by remaining silent.
-Dalai Lama

Offline MKing

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #24 on: April 01, 2014, 09:38:56 AM »
If the ark had come to rest on the top of Mount Ararat, this would be at 17,000 foot elevation. Olive trees (and every other tree) do not grow at 17,000 feet.

Tell it to Hollywood. They had beaches there as well. But really, is the Hollywood version likely to be any more real than the original story itself?

Quote from: Ashvin
In fact, you will not find olive trees growing much above 5,000 feet. Therefore, we know from the Bible that the ark did not come to rest on or near the top of Mount Ararat, but probably somewhere on the foothills of the mountain.

"we know from the Bible"...good one! The quality level of that statement being equivalent to "we know from Hollywood"....

In either case, while both the Bible and Hollywood tell stories, Hollywood sure does it better with the moving pictures rather than all those thou's and shalt's and whatnot.
Sometimes one creates a dynamic impression by saying something, and sometimes one creates as significant an impression by remaining silent.
-Dalai Lama

Offline MKing

  • Contrarian
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3354
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #25 on: April 01, 2014, 09:52:22 AM »
  Industrial civilization has been spoiled with an even climate.  NTHE is way off base, but we are in for a lot of pain compared to what we've grown accustomed to.

See that warm spike back there about 15,000 years ago? Right back there somewhere Lake Connecticut cut lose and formed what is modern day Long Island, I'm imagining that everyone downstream of that particular "warming but no coal fired power plants around to blame it on" event was in for a lot of pain as well. There was pain all around during the Roman Warmings (and accompanied cooling), the Medieval warming (and attendant cooling), the Minoan warming and CRAP look at that 8200BP cooling! since the end of the last ice age. Humans were born to pain and uncertainty of the world around them, learned to adapt along the way, were occasionally nearly wiped out, suffered mightily, and today is no different except the global communication system allows the whining about it (and anything else) to be amplified all out of proportion. 

Sometimes one creates a dynamic impression by saying something, and sometimes one creates as significant an impression by remaining silent.
-Dalai Lama

Offline DoomerSupport

  • Administrator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 1157
  • Fiat collapsus rualt caelum
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #26 on: April 01, 2014, 10:13:33 AM »
Quote
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/gilgamesh.html
"The first striking thing that one notices when reading the Epic of Gilgamesh is how silly the story is. Part of the silliness is because of the obviously human-like behavior of the gods. They are constantly fighting amongst each other, plotting and deceiving each other.

Of course the behavior of Gods is very human like, we were made in their image, at least according to your God.  Take a look at the variety of religions, both current and ancient, where the Gods experience the same dilemmas, go through similar types of struggles, yet on a different scale.  A gulf of power separates us, but we are alike.  The Indian Gods battled, the Norse gods plotted and schemed, the Celtic Gods went to war.  Politics and intrigue roamed the hallowed halls of deity far and wide.

Taken within the context of multiple pantheons of Gods, one 'family' of Gods stands out as different to the rest, in that it is now tries to claim a "privilege" over everything - effectively the "1%" of Gods.  It sees itself as "better" than everyone else, deserving of all the attention and worship of all creation, not just it's own little desert tribe.  It believes in a monopoly over all things, particularly worship; enforced at the end of the sword, with those who won't buy into it's way of doing things butchered.  It even has it's own occupy movement - they are called heretics.

It is a smart marketer, creating the first "instant gratification" - salvation though faith - that quickly undermined the more established products on the market and their own corrupt supply chains (as we established, Gods have human traits).

The children of this family even suffer from Affulenza - everyone else has to die, but no, dad has to intervene for the "special" kid, raise him us and sit him where he can keep an eye on him.  Oh, and use control of the MSM to spread the story that he never did a thing wrong even once in his life.  Dad does promise him he can go back and smash up all the others kids' toys one day, though.  :)

I've yet to come across any "God" that interacts with humanity who is not like humans - after a fashion.  Yahweh makes our 1% seem like benevolent angels looking over us lesser mortals.  The destruction of places of worship belonging to competing religions were systematically destroyed, a little more aggressively than Walmart does moving into an area, but it had a similar impact on the local spiritual ecosystem.  Where there was variety, monoculture reduced the landscape to blandness.  Like that same 1%, it has opposed education, preferring an ignorant and easily manipulated herd.  Feudalism is God's business model made manifest on earth.


Quote
One would expect this part of the story to be removed from a Genesis copy. Therefore, we would expect that the Genesis account would be changed to involve some kind of judgment, since Yahweh (God) does not capriciously destroy humans, as was done in the Gilgamesh epic.

No, he has a reason - they were not making him enough profit (giving worship).  Destroying those weaker than oneself is acceptable if its in line with the corporate agenda. The suckers in the 99% will even believe you if you tell them, "that was the last right-sizing' of the workforce."

He had a reason too, when he sent bears to kill children for making fun of a bald spot.  He had a reason when he tired to encourage human sacrifice from Abraham, and the, "you won't?  Okay, good, I was just testing you," would be familiar to anyone who has been pushed past breaking point by an abuser with power over them.

The "God of the Book" is very human in its behavior and how it orders the universe around it.  The structure of heaven from the middle ages was the current social order on a divine scale, with a torture chamber in the basement and all the peasants giving him what he craves, - more attention than any of the other gods.

To argue that the other accounts are unrealistic because their Gods were more like us ignores the fact that the Abrahamic god is a reflection of the idea that a powerful individual or cabal deserves to control our lives.  The 1%.  The Illuminati.  The Holy Church.  The idea that it's okay to abrogate personal responsibility to an elite who you see as "better" than you.


Quote
The boats in the two accounts are quite different. The Gilgamesh boat was an unseaworthy cube with a slate roof. Obviously, such a design would immediately flip over or roll around in the water. In contrast, the ark had dimensions that were ideal for a seaworthy ship. This fact might be surprising, since both cultures were not noted for their nautical skills. It is obvious that the gods of the Sumerians had no expertise in shipbuilding."[/i]

The idea that the ark could float is a matter of faith, much like the Gilgamesh boat, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who knows ship building who would say it was seaworthy - the faithful followers of the divine 1% excepted.

It's okay to believe one's God is "special" and one's relationship with that God is "special".  It touches a deep human need that probably goes back to our mothers telling us how important we were to them. One's relationship with divinity is unique, one does not have to claim that your God is the only God or the only valid God to enjoy that relationship. 

Your "Gods" need to be the only game in town is a very ... human failing.

:)


Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 42050
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #27 on: April 01, 2014, 03:54:48 PM »
His travels all over the then known world as far as greece and back over many months were walked, which he could not have done with melanoma prone skin tone. He was undoubtedly a darky.

Maybe he carried a Sunbrella?



RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #28 on: April 02, 2014, 04:27:36 AM »
Certainly I didn't say Billy Graham was racist, just that he wouldn't recognize the second coming if it was a black child born in Africa any better than he did that of David Koresh.

Picking and choosing among those claiming to be the return of Christ can be awful tricky I imagine.

The Second Coming is not supposed to be the birth of any child, anywhere. Maybe you should become familiar with the doctrine before making judgments about it and people who believe in it.

Just a thought  ::)

Offline Ashvin

  • Troll
  • Sous Chef
  • *
  • Posts: 3205
    • View Profile
Re: Movie review: Noah
« Reply #29 on: April 02, 2014, 04:38:27 AM »
To argue that the other accounts are unrealistic because their Gods were more like us ignores the fact that the Abrahamic god is a reflection of the idea that a powerful individual or cabal deserves to control our lives.  The 1%.  The Illuminati.  The Holy Church.  The idea that it's okay to abrogate personal responsibility to an elite who you see as "better" than you.

The argument is that other accounts are inaccurate renditions of the same underlying real event. If the event happened, some traditions recounting it are bound to be inaccurate.

You seem to think that comparing the Biblical narratives and Yahweh to "the 1%" is a substitute for making an actual argument...

Sorry, the New Atheists have made all of those reckless state-before-you-read/think conclusions before, and none of them hold weight when looking at what the OT actually says.

Quote
The idea that the ark could float is a matter of faith, much like the Gilgamesh boat, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who knows ship building who would say it was seaworthy - the faithful followers of the divine 1% excepted.

Right, like the people who have actually re-created the Ark according to biblical dimensions and put it on water?

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1169 Views
Last post January 23, 2017, 04:12:45 PM
by Guest
5 Replies
1561 Views
Last post October 05, 2018, 01:41:21 PM
by azozeo
0 Replies
386 Views
Last post February 10, 2019, 12:31:21 PM
by Eddie