Ken Ham went to see the movie. I think he’s giving it a thumbs down.
I am disgusted. I am going to come right out and say it–it is disgusting and evil–paganism! Do you really want your family to see a pagan movie the has Noah as some psychopath who says if his daughter-in-law’s baby is a girl, he will kill it as soon as it’s born. And then when two girls are born, bloodstained Noah (the man the Bible calls righteous Noah–Genesis 7:1), brings a knife down to one of the baby’s heads to kill it and at the last minute doesn’t do it–and then a bit later says he failed because he didn’t kill the babies. How can we recommend this movie and then speak against abortion! Psychopathic Noah sees humans as a blight on the planet and wants to rid the world of people.
While in the true Biblical worldview, it’s psychopathic God who sees humans as a blight on the planet and wants to rid the world of people. How dare a mere man act as if he were created in God’s image?
Me, I’m kinda warming to the movie now.
I give it a thumbs down without watching it! This helps! :-)
Oh FFS!
Have you actually read that book you believe in, Mr. Ham? Noah isn’t a good guy, anymore than that god of yours.
No one’s going to click your link Eric.
Ken has taken step one of the three step program to loose his religion. The NPR review of ‘Noah’ complained of a lack of dialogue.
Yes!!! Yes!!! Yes!!!
No!!! No!!! No!!!
We will stick with the Aesir and Olympians. For a minute there, I was all excited. It is time for another Thor movie.
How is this different from the psychopath Abraham?
“Noah isn’t a good guy”
Where do you get a standard of “good” in your worldview?
This is in fact, the central idea of the fundie xians, most of whom are Rapturists and End Timers.
Their best idea is to sit around in a catatonic daze, waiting, hoping, and praying that jesus will come back Any Day Now, kill 7 billion people, and destroy the earth.
We have better things to do with our time and hopes for the future more worthwhile than this.
Wait, so you guys don’t believe in Noah and the Flood?
By finding out what Eric Hovind and the fundies think is good and choosing the opposite.
Fundies are evil and it works reasonably well.
Raven,
Perhaps you could enlighten us as to what the purpose of life is. Where do Atheists get “purpose” in a universe without “purpose”?
Raven,
What is your standard of “good”? What is “evil” according to your worldview?
Eric, stay on topic or take your leading questions about Absolute Morals to the Thunderdome.
Actually, that might actually be on topic in this thread. Might need someone else to weigh in on that one!
The purpose of life is to make our purpose.
Since there are no gods to do it for us.
@11 erichovind: WAY off topic here. If you’re truly curious, I’m going to go post a reply in the Thunderdome (give me a little time to write it out).
@erichovind:
Fuck you. I’m tired of religious assholes like you dehumanizing me.
My purpose in life is to live my life as I want to live it. If I want to eat Cheetos and watch funny movies, then I’ll do that. As long as what I’m doing isn’t harming anyone else, I will do it. My purpose is to make the existence of everyone around me better, a little bit more humorous, a little bit more intellectual, and a little bit more fun.
This is not a freaking bible movie!
Just because it’s based on a bible story doesn’t mean it’s a bible story.
=====
Why on earth would I be interested in spending a dram of effort doing that when you you obviously don’t have any interest in listening.
The universe is not “without ‘purpose'”. There’s over three billion square miles of ocean for me to sail. As well as several thousand three star restaurants to try, a daughter to see through college, and a novel to write. And many, many, many scientific studies to learn about.
That’s a really stupid question. Stop putting words in people’s mouths when you obviously aren’t interested in what anyone else has to say.
There was a very good video narrated by Stephen Fry released the other day by the British Humanist Society, have a look on Youtube.
In short, we have to find our own purpose, our own reason to get up and face the challenges of the new day. Our purpose could be to fight for civil rights, to try to help the poor and weak, create great works of art, or simply to raise a family and keep them safe from the vicissitudes of the world.
The only things which have an inherent purpose in this life are tools. A hammer’s pupose is to bash nails, a calculator’s pupose is to solve sums. We aren’t tools, we are the awe-inspiring amalgamation of billions of interdependant cells working together to briefly give a tiny fraction of the cosmos, a chance to know itself.
We’re not hammers or calculators, we’re more like Lego or modelling clay, a collection of parts with the chance to become a magnificent whole.
Quote fail by the Hovind – that was psychopathic YHWH’s decision, not Noah’s. Do you ever read that book of psychotic crap you pretend to follow?
Kevin,
Where do you get that “purpose” from?
Quote fail by Ham – not Hovind.
Uh, didn’t God drown, like, everyone? I mean, sure, he missed one family, but that still rounds to 100% with lots of significant digits. Is Noah’s view really that different from God’s?
THUNDERDOME!
@erichovind: My reply’s now up here: http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2014/03/22/thunderdome-43/comment-page-2/#comment-772942
@erichovind
Where do you get your standard of good and purpose from in your worldview?
@erichovind:
Take it to Thunderdome.
I’ve read (over at Cuttlefish) that this is actually a movie about Global Warming. And the choices that will force on us.
Is this atheist (Darren Aronofsky) just seeing if he can make fun of the Bible and get Christians to pay for it?
Where do you get that “purpose” from? You couldn’t have determined it for yourself, using your observation and experience…it must come from GOD!
Where do you get your “good” and “evil” from? You couldn’t have determined them for yourself, using your observation and experience…they must come from GOD!! Er, wait, good comes from GOD!! The other comes from SATAN!!
Where do you get your “exquisite shoes,” “average car,” and “lousy shrimp salad” from? You couldn’t have acquired them yourself, using your observation, experience, and resources…they must come from GOD!!! Um, hold on, shoes and cars and shrimp and salad greens come from GOD!!! But the Bible tells us shellfish must not be eaten, so shrimp salad–especially if it’s lousy–is an ABOMINATION and must come from EL DIABLO DE LA PIT!!!
Really, the answers are OBVIOUS when you THINK about them, atheists!!!!
Oh, noes, the flood movie has some crazy-mean guy!
Eric Hovind, your dad believes that a billion people died in the flood. I saw him put up a graph of population growth since the flood, to prove the flood, and he had a billion people before the flood. There was no logic to that part of the graph, it was just something he wanted to be true. Kent Hovind imagined a world population of a billion people just so they could die in the flood.
Kent Hovind then mocked and ridiculed the victims of the flood. He said that underground oil is made from the bodies of people who drowned in the flood. He mimed putting gasoline in a car and hollered, “So long, Grandpa, you should have listened to Noah!” He laughed, and the church laughed along with him.
That last bit happened a few minutes after he condemned atheists for believing that dead people became nothing but worm dirt. The churchly folk had shuddered with him.
The Flood, as recounted in the bible, is incredibly cruel, and literally impossible. Anyone who believes in it or defends it is a horrible person. Anyone who bases their religion on their own cruel improvements to it is a truly evil being.
Eric Hovind, you either renounce your father’s evil or you get the fuck away from decent people.
What a silly sounding movie, rife with inaccuracies. It is well documented in the Bible that God is really into killing sons.
Mirror neurons
Bible believing Christians have renounced their humanity, and cast their lots with an evil, though imaginary, murderous bastard. To look to such a loathsome character as their god speaks volumes about their morals or lack thereof. It’s a good thing for all of us that their god is nothing more than the culmination of the sick, twisted iron age fantasies of fear written into that book by ignorant men.
Is this atheist (Darren Aronofsky) just seeing if he can make fun of the Bible and get Christians to pay for it?
That would be hilarious, wouldn’t it? I can see all kinds of sequels, beginning with Job (you know, the one where your god’s all buddy-buddy with the Adversary?)
How many women were pregnant when god caused the flood? Was that abortion?
I listen to whatever you say it is, and do the opposite. It’s a pretty safe bet.
The purpose of life is to Grow Up.
Adam and Eve found it, in the Eden fairy tale.
I wish Hovind would.
What is your standard of “good”? What is “evil” according to your worldview?
I’m going to be charitable and assume you don’t murder children.
Now is that because you don’t want to murder children or because God doesn’t want you to?
If they portray Noah as a murderous, humanity hating psychopath as his god evidently is, it might make for an interesting story. The Bible stories are so old, tired, and boring I think the only way to interest me in seeing one would be to put a twist on it: this happened sort of like this, but god never spoke to him, he’s just schizophrenic. Or you know, Satan is the good guy, God is the bad guy…
But Russel Crowe looks so bad in the previews that I don’t think there’s a review that could make me watch this. Or maybe it’s because I saw Les Miserable and now I just think Crowe’s awful in general.
Why wouldn’t an atheitst (and how do you know Aronofsky is an atheist) have a relevant story to tell about the Noah story? And Christians didn’t pay for it; paramount pictures paid for it.
Does this offend you? Or this?
Everybody knows that killing your daughter is unbiblical. The proper thing to do is to sell her into slavery.
“Noah as some psychopath who says if his daughter-in-law’s baby is a girl, he will kill it as soon as it’s born.”
So Ham now agrees that Yahweh, who killed millions of unborn & young babies in the flood, is a psychopath. Good, he’s making progress.
Obviously, the problem is that Noah was going to use a knife instead of dashing the baby against a rock.
Someone should have told Jephthah.
From within my own brain. Which is the exact same place you get your standard of “good”. The only difference between us is that I choose not to justify it post hoc by pretending it came from an imaginary external source arbitrarily labeled “god.”
From within my own brain. Which, again, is exactly the same place you get yours from, except that I don’t pretend post hoc that it came from an imaginary external source arbitrarily labeled with the useless, information-empty monikor “god.”
Rape trigger!
One’s daughters should be offered for rape, like Lot wanted to happen to his daughters.
@45
It’s really too bad there wasn’t a Bible for Jephthah to consult, or he might have realized that God is a bit of a fucker and not been too quick to make him any promises.
@erichovind
ERIC HOVIND, hi! I don’t want to derail this thread too much, but please come over to the Thunderdome so we can talk! Your dad was instrumental in getting me to learn about evolutionary biology — seriously, if my Bible-thumping friend hadn’t handed me Kent Hovind’s lecture series back in middle school, I might never have read The Blind Watchmaker, and my life would be so much poorer for it! Let’s chat over here, ok?
It’s Barbapapa! :)
I haven’t seen him since I was a kid!
— Ken Ham.
There’s some very interesting, and disturbing, warped psychology going on here, since as has been pointed out, that was God’s approach to the matter in the Bible…
Whether it’s warped psychology going on in Ham’s head, or warped psychology he’s trying to work on his flock, I cannot tell.
— Ken Ham, later that same Facebook page.
Spare a thought for poor violated Yahweh, even the nutjob fundamentalists are refusing to read what’s actually in the fucking Bible these days. Oh this World! This wicked World!
That’s not strictly true, you must stone her to death if she’s not a virgin when she marries. Deuteronomy 22:20-21
The legislation on rape is also prone to lethal interpretations. Unless it happens in the countryside, then she gets a reprieve. Deuteronomy 22:23-27.
And of course, if you’re a priest and you find out she’s been disgracing you by prostituting herself. Then you burn her alive. Leviticus 21:9
I know the little hovindians all seem to have gone home to tea now, but I kind of have to thank haroldweasley for the laugh. That was so damn funny :-D
It’s so sad that they actually don’t mean to be funny, though. Just take haroldweasley for example – with that big-eyed innocence and deadpan delivery he could be the best straight man in the business.
@47 Al Dente
Rape trigger!
Indeed. But in that particular case a very specific and important piece of context is necessary. The Law of Hospitality in the Near East then and to a great extent now is difficult for a 21st century American-raised person to understand. Guests were quite literally sacred. The moment you accepted them into your home their safety and needs became more important than your own for the duration of the stay. Awful as it is Lot’s action has to be understood in light of this.
No, absolutely, anuran (@51), I get it.
The bible portrays people who, rather than bar a door to prevent anyone from getting raped, rather than risking themselves in protecting others, offers daughters to be raped so as to avoid getting a reputation as someone who doesn’t honor a masculine guest not only as the **most moral person around** (which might, admittedly, be a low bar to clear in some locales) but as a person **worthy of an omnipotent, benevolent god’s praise**.
Masculine guests are sacred; women and girls are icky. The choice was easy in its context. I don’t see how that makes Al Dente’s comment less potent. Indeed isn’t that part of Al Dente’s point?
Ham did make one honest point about it being an extremely boring film. I could guess that even without watching it. The whole story could be told in about 15 minutes tops – so there has to be endless filler to try to make it interesting – the story is not exactly epic material like the The Illiad.
Is there ever a woman guest with guest-status anywhere in the bible? Or are they always the property of real i.e. male guests? Just idle curiosity.
What is wrong with Noah, not enough incest?
Ken Ham review on Youtube in an hour. What fun that will be.
Breitbart is onto you, atheists!
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2014/03/28/Noah-review-brilliantly-sinister-anti-christian-filmmaking
…. honestly though, the only thing funnier than Breitbart’s articles are the comments, although I do usually need to take a shower afterwards.
mikeyb @53:
The Iliad did have more sociopathic characters, so there is that. I’ve been anticipating (in the bad sense) Tarantino’s treatment. On the other hand, the flood myth probably has its roots in the birth of agriculture, and what we quaintly refer to as ‘civilization’. Not too shoddy, epic-wise. Just needs the right interpretation.
@57. Good point.
Turns out Ray Comfort doesn’t like it either. As more and more of these crazies come out against it, it may turn out that it is worth checking out after all. At least when it comes out at the dollar theater.
The Hamster doesn’t like it.
It’s out of the Comfort Zone.
Hovind wasn’t a fan.
Breitbart is giving birth to a porcupine (transverse presentation) over it.
Sounds like it’s worth watching.
This is the funniest thing Ham has ever put up on his site. It’s comedy gold.
It seems to me that Noah (pretending for a moment that he existed) was either a psychopath or a monster. If he were a psychopath, we might understand that he couldn’t empathise with the entire human race who died because he didn’t tell them to get on something floaty. Otherwise, we have to assume he fully understood that he was doing a monstrous thing and did it anyway.
There’s an alternative reading of Genesis. Maybe god was testing Noah. Maybe he wanted Noah to save everyone and was testing for management potential rather than obedience. It was the first series of The Apprentice. This fits the narrative of why Noah’s life didn’t work out so well after the flood and is still in line with god’s relentless hurting and murdering everyone since (despite promising not to) to prove a point he never bothered to tell anyone about in the first place.
Psycho god, for sure. But you’d think psycho Noah was more parsimonious with Ham’s views than monster Noah.
Seems it’s only sycopathic if there’s not Ego Eimi/Yahuwah voice approbating it.
For instance, at Lev 26; Deut 28; Lam 4; Ezek 5; Jer 19
Jesus (i.e. the ego/eimi/yahuwah – ante-incarnation) thretns:
I WILL MAKE PARENTS EAT THEIR OWN CHILDREN
(capitals fr melodrama – I’m not shouting but Jesus is..)
Jesus also sets children on fire e.g. unauthorised fires – lev 10.
Now since this is deemd ‘good’ – as God, Jesus can du no bad..
why don’t the likes of Hovind and Ham proclaim this as Jesus wunderful behaviur with the same zeal
as they du…
‘for God thus loved the wurld that he gave…’
Or is Jesus behaviur sometimes less good than other times……but by whose standards can u say so?
UGH, Spoiler tags, please!
Just kidding, I don’t give a shit about this movie. I’m beyond the “OMG Darren Aronofsky is soooo amazing!” phase.
I’m just guessing here, but I don’t believe that this person has ever read the bible… either that or they secretly don’t agree with it. According to the story, humans are a blight on the planet, and the flood is coming for exactly that purpose. How can you call Noah a psychopath for being in complete agreement with God?!
Oh… wow. I should learn to read full posts before replying. Ken Ham wrote that? Ken “Answers In Genesis” Ham either hasn’t read, or disagrees with the content of Genesis? Snrk.
@erichovind, 7
Ok, so the first thing you have to do is think about pain. Have you ever felt it? Think of all the different kinds of pain that you’ve felt.
Now, think about other people. Imagine that they are capable of thinking and feeling, just like you are. Don’t worry, you don’t have to believe it, just imagine it. Now, combine your thoughts of pain with your thought experiment of these “other people” and their imaginary “ability to feel.”
And you’re pretty much done. There is more to it than that – you have to be able to think about things like “future” and “consequence,” and work those into your ideas of “other people” “feeling” pain – but you can work on the more complicated details later.
@29
Is this atheist (Darren Aronofsky) just seeing if he can make fun of the Bible and get Christians to pay for it?
You’re starting to sound catholic Eric. The world doesn’t actually revolve around what you believe. The story of Noah is well known to many different groups of people, not just your favorite types of christians, not just christians in general, not even just theists in general. So, it might just be that the director really doesn’t give a fuck what you and your mates think about it and is just producing the biggest spectacle he could from the basic premises of the story.
Ok, i get it, that’s a bit boring. It’s much more fun to play your persecution angle. Sorry for trying to educate you about the world outside, may your cross be appropriately heavy.
The film makers can avoid further trouble quite easily. Just rename the movie ‘Utnapishtim’. May require some overdubbing, but otherwise it’s a fairly simple fix.
So let me get this straight. Noah, as depicted in the movie, is a psychopath because he threatened to kill a baby and stopped at the last minute. Abraham on the other hand is a veritable paragon of morality. Hmm.