I have not gone to see the “amazing” film Noah because I don’t wish to waste my time and money, on something which is clearly not only not biblically accurate, but is blatantly anti-biblical.
But, since it has been in the news, and is grabbing people’s attention, I figured “why not” take this opportunity to share the truth behind not only the film, but also, related to the topic of the Biblical Flood of the Biblical Noah, as found in Genesis chapters 6-9.
First, Dr. Brian Mattson has written a brilliant and lengthy, in-depth critique of the film,Noah which is well-worth your time. You can find that here, and a follow-up here.
“In his defense, I suppose, the film wasn’t advertised as such. Nowhere is it said that this movie is an adaptation of Genesis. It was never advertised as “The Bible’s Noah,” or “The Biblical Story of Noah.” In our day and age we are so living in the leftover atmosphere of Christendom that when somebody says they want to do “Noah,” everybody assumesthey mean a rendition of the Bible story. That isn’t what Aronofsky had in mind at all. I’m sure he was only too happy to let his studio go right on assuming that, since if they knew what he was really up to they never would have allowed him to make the movie.”
Dr. Brian also prepared a video on the same subject, which can be viewed here.
Brian Godawa also blogged about this film, on his blog Hollywood Worldviews, in a post entitled: The Subversion of God in Aronofsky’s Noah. You can read that post here.
Interestingly enough, there was research confirming the reliability of the message presented in the Flood passage, which came out close to the time of the film’s release (cool how God works, eh?).
The first bit is from the Institute for Creation Research (Dallas, TX) – they posted on their Facebook page (which is where I found it), a link to an article about water being discovered deep in the earth’s mantle.
“How far below Earth’s surface can we find water? There is no way to drill hundreds of miles down, so researchers must wait for evidence to surface from the depths. An international science team recently reported in Nature their find of a unique Brazilian diamond inclusion that indicates plenty of water at great depth.1 How does this compare to biblical descriptions of Earth’s structure?”
Here is another article, on the same topic, from the University of Alberta. I’m sure that the science community is scratching their heads about this new find.
By the way, the water was discovered in-between the upper and lower mantles of the earth, in what is known as the “transition zone” (which is approximately somewhere between 410-660 km deep into the earth’s crust).
I also came across a fascinating article from The Telegraph newspaper, which ran a surprising headline: “Noah’s Ark would have floated… even with 70,000 animals” – um, what? Not something we’re likely to see in every day’s newspaper. It is an interesting read, and I encourage you to take a look at it here, and another article (from ICR) on the same subject.
“Previous research has suggested that there were approximately 35,000 species of animals which would have needed to be saved by Noah,” according to The Telegraph, though they cited no source for this estimate. Doubling this number to account for a male and female of each species, the student group estimated that the ark needed to have held approximately 70,000 creatures. To the students’ surprise, they found that this amount did not exceed the total mass the ark could contain. Physics student Thomas Morris told The Telegraph, “You don’t think of the Bible necessarily as a scientifically accurate source of information, so I guess we were quite surprised when we discovered it would work.” The students published their results in Leicester University’s Journal of Physics Special Topics.
So, there’s a whole plate full of reading for you, my readers to partake of over the next few days. As always, I post hoping to inform and inspire my audience, and to equip, because the equipped person, is the person who is able to give answers to those who ask questions… and there is no such thing as a stupid question.