Noah: Is this a good movie? Is it good ancient history?

[Teallaura]

SOOOOOO missing this movie...

[TimelessTheist]

It's a Biblical movie written by an atheist.....that should tell you something.

[Catholicity]

Just to remind people. AIG doesn't like anything that isn't quoted from the Bible and this includes things that aren't their version of the Bible.

[Teallaura]

Just to remind people. AIG doesn't like anything that isn't quoted from the Bible and this includes things that aren't their version of the Bible.

Are you saying Mattson belongs to AIG?

Besides, AIG doesn't seem to be alone in having problems with this thing.

[rogue06]

Are you saying Mattson belongs to AIG?

Besides, AIG doesn't seem to be alone in having problems with this thing.

Um... From AiG:

Source: The Noah Movie: Our Detailed Review

Noah is a film filled with blasphemous representations of God and character assassinations of Noah. It distorts biblical truth in a way that is dangerous and will have a corrupting influence on those who watch the film without an accurate understanding of what the Bible actually teaches. Though we do not call for a boycott of the film, AiG does not recommend that anyone see this film. But we know that there will be those who will see it. Because of that, there is an opportunity for Christians to interact with those non-Christians who have seen the film.

Source

© Copyright Original Source

[One Bad Pig]

My sister said it didn't to my parents too. The rumor is coming from SOMEWHERE....

Could be a mix-up with the fact that God never speaks in the movie.

[Teallaura]

Um... From AiG:

Source: The Noah Movie: Our Detailed Review

Noah is a film filled with blasphemous representations of God and character assassinations of Noah. It distorts biblical truth in a way that is dangerous and will have a corrupting influence on those who watch the film without an accurate understanding of what the Bible actually teaches. Though we do not call for a boycott of the film, AiG does not recommend that anyone see this film. But we know that there will be those who will see it. Because of that, there is an opportunity for Christians to interact with those non-Christians who have seen the film.

Source

© Copyright Original Source

A simple 'no' would suffice. I skimmed AIG's piece - Mattson's is far more damning in that he demonstrates that the movie draws heavily from Gnosticism - which, last I looked, was still heretical.

Seriously, the obsession with AIG is silly. There are a number of Christian and related sources that have raised objections so the issue is hardly one of following AIG.

[robrecht]

Um... From AiG:

Source: The Noah Movie: Our Detailed Review

Noah is a film filled with blasphemous representations of God and character assassinations of Noah. It distorts biblical truth in a way that is dangerous and will have a corrupting influence on those who watch the film without an accurate understanding of what the Bible actually teaches. Though we do not call for a boycott of the film, AiG does not recommend that anyone see this film. But we know that there will be those who will see it. Because of that, there is an opportunity for Christians to interact with those non-Christians who have seen the film.

Source

© Copyright Original Source

I agree that one should not see the movie without also being well versed in the Biblical account, at least one will be able to better appreciate the movie if one has read the Bible (and the book of Enoch).

I'm not sure I understand AiG's distinction between recommending people not see the movie and calling for a boycott. Would the latter be some kind of more authoritative condemnation? Do some people view AiG as having some kind of ecclesial authority? I don't know hardly anything about them but I thought they were just a website and theme park. Are they something more than that?

[Teallaura]

Depends on who you're asking - they're either evul Creationists or the vanguard of creation science. My personal opinion is that both views are overblown and if we aren't actually discussing evolution, it's a moot point.

Am I the only one that finds the gnostic theory far more important than whether or not AIG likes the thing?

[robrecht]

Depends on who you're asking - they're either evul Creationists or the vanguard of creation science. My personal opinion is that both views are overblown and if we aren't actually discussing evolution, it's a moot point.

Am I the only one that finds the gnostic theory far more important than whether or not AIG likes the thing?

But what do they think and say of themselves? Do they see themselves as having some kind of ecclesial or other form of authority beyond that of recommending people not see the movie?

Personally, I think the gnostic/kabbalah/Enoch interpretations are much more important but there are points that I'm not sure of without looking up some passages that I only vaguely remember.

[Teallaura]

But what do they think and say of themselves? Do they see themselves as having some kind of ecclesial or other form of authority beyond that of recommending people not see the movie?

Don't think so but see for yourself: http://www.answersingenesis.org/about

Personally, I think the gnostic/kabbalah/Enoch interpretations are much more important but there are points that I'm not sure of without looking up some passages that I only vaguely remember.

When you get around to it, post the citations, please. I'm not familiar enough with it to look things up without a lot of time and effort I don't have time for right now, but I would like to read up.

[robrecht]

Don't think so but see for yourself: http://www.answersingenesis.org/about
When you get around to it, post the citations, please. I'm not familiar enough with it to look things up without a lot of time and effort I don't have time for right now, but I would like to read up.

They only say they are an apologetic ministry. I will if I find the time.

[robrecht]

Took a group of kids to see Captain America last night. Not as interesting as Noah.

[John Reece]

Are you saying Mattson belongs to AIG?

Besides, AIG doesn't seem to be alone in having problems with this thing.

I do not think that Mattson has anything to do with AIG.

Dr. Brian Mattson Welcome to my website !

I am a theologian, writer, speaker, singer/songwriter, recording artist, and I avidly follow current events, cultural and political, as well as the Minnesota Twins Baseball Club.

I was born, raised, and currently live in the State of Montana, Big Sky Country, or, as we like to call it, "The Last Best Place." Educationally, I obtained a B.A. from Montana State University-Billings, an M.A.R. from Westminster Theological Seminary, and a Ph.D. in Systematic Theology from the University of Aberdeen (Scotland). I now serve as Senior Scholar of Public Theology for the Center for Cultural Leadership. I am honored as well to serve as faculty for the Alliance Defending Freedom's Blackstone Legal Fellowship and Collegiate Academy. I also co-host and produce Dead Reckoning, a weekly web video show and podcast.

I hope you enjoy my musings, my music, teaching, web show, podcasts, and other contributions. Thanks for stopping by!

There is much good stuff on the website that cannot be linked individually. I found this entry to be interesting:

NOAH'S CO-WRITER SPEAKS

Ari Handel, co-writer of Noah, was interviewed by Relevant Magazine about the controversial theology in the film. He's one of those guys that just gives a terrific interview (he's one of the reasons I saw it in the first place), and I recommend it to you.

My takeaways:

Handel's a really intelligent, diplomatic, and articulate guy. Smart to have him be the "voice" of the filmmakers.

A key passage:

"What I’d tell people is it’s very important to us that nothing we actually did directly contradicted the Genesis story. There are some places where people think we did, and I’d just say, 'We didn’t.' It was all grounded somewhere. It wasn’t just the Genesis story the way you expected it. But it’s grounded. Anything we did that isn’t explicitly there isn’t arbitrary."

It was all grounded somewhere.

Exactly. Grounded in texts outside the biblical narrative. That's not, in and of itself, problematic. But the texts they used, as far as I can tell, are a hodgepodge amalgamation of things, some of which are esoteric traditions that have an interest in subverting the biblical story, not affirming it. Also notice that he confirms that nothing in the film is accidental. Everything was thoughtful and "grounded" in a source somewhere. That's what I suspected.

He insists that nothing "contradicted the Genesis story." First, I take that as an admission of my original point: many details, themes, and symbols are simply not from the Genesis story. Second, he's just wrong that "nothing" contradicted the Genesis story. Plenty of others have plowed that field, so I needn't rehash it.

About the snake skin thing, Handel ought to know what he was thinking, and I'm glad he cleared it up. The idea of a "skin" of immortality that the Serpent shed is found in nascent form, (one source, no doubt, among others) in Philo of Alexandria, Questions and Answers on Genesis, I, 33. His idea is that the snake wanted to appear young and innocent, so as to deceive Eve into thinking he had the key to remaining... young and innocent. Suffice it to say, there's nothing about passing this skin along as an artifact.

It's interesting, to be sure. But if you're unaware of who Philo is, let's just say that he is the father of reading the Hebrew Bible in obscure, allegorical ways that conform it to Platonic philosophy (i.e., the "graded" universe of spirit/mind/male="higher and good," matter/flesh/female="lower and bad"). He's the head of a stream that ultimately forms the river of precisely the kinds of Neoplatonic speculation I originally identified in my review.

As it is, Aronofsky and Handel have taken the symbol of the Serpent (a Gnostic "dog whistle" of all dog whistles) and turned it into a magical blessing; they have the characters wrap it around their arms reminiscent of Jewish Teffilin, the small, black boxes that contain the Torah.

Replacing Torah with a Serpent.

If people still want to believe (perhaps even Handel himself) that this isn't a subversion, they can. But I'm not buying it.

[robrecht]

Thanks, John. There's no question that the movie offers a subversive reading of Genesis based on extra-biblical texts. I would not recommend it to anyone who does not expect this and is not prepared for this.