Monday, 31 March 2014

NOAH: "The least biblical film ever made" -Aronovsky. "ANTI-biblical" - WhoCanStand. (A Christian Review)

Here at WHO CAN STAND, we stand on the truth of Scripture. And so when it comes to Hollywood depictions, we understand that they will always fall short of the beauty of the biblical story.  There will be areas where directors and screenwriters will have to make decisions about what to depict where Scripture is silent, and we knew this had to be the case with the Noah movie.  However, we can hope the filmmakers remain faithful to the context of the whole Bible, which the Noah movie most certainly failed to do.  The movie is not only unbiblical (including extra-biblical information and getting certain information wrong) but more importantly it is anti-biblical.  It goes against what we know to be true about God, men, and their relationship with one another.

(We have seen the movie and are going to be free with sharing any part of the plot relevant to our points throughout this review, just so you know!)

The worst thing about the Noah movie was how it depicted God - referred to as "The Creator" throughout the film.  The God in the movie gives Noah limited information about what will happen and leaves him in confusion about how to fulfill His plans.  By the resolution of the movie, it's been "made clear" that "God" did this on purpose, so as to allow Noah himself to make the decision about what would be the outcome of mankind.  The movie puts mercy strictly in the hand of Noah - stripping "God" of it almost completely.  Noah's wife reiterates that their family is "good" because they have "love in their hearts", and "Isn't that all you need to be good?", she asks.  Noah - who rightly sees the wickedness within all of them - understands that it would be just if God chose for them to die.  What the movie fails to show is it was God's mercy that saved Noah, his family, and mankind.  In the film, in not murdering his grandchildren, it is Noah who is shown to be merciful, not God, and Noah's mercy is made out as potentially disobedient to God.

In truth, God's mercy towards mankind is completed in the work of bringing Jesus Christ through the lineage of Noah.  When you read the biblical text, you get a sense of the hope within the story - hope which points to and is realized in the death and resurrection of Jesus - who was foreshadowed even at the fall of Adam and Eve.  There is little hope in the resolution of the Noah movie, and there is no allusion to a coming savior.  (As a Jewish atheist, one wouldn't expect this from Aronofsky, but even he would know that God was preserving the line of Noah in order to bring the Messiah.)

Many have spoken of the environmental slant of the film, and the truth is that we get a glimpse of what radical environmentalism does look like in the lunacy of Noah in the second half of the film.   His desire is only to see the animals and creation saved and preserved in a state untouched by humans.  Noah values animal life over human life - like some of the proponents of the environmental movement today. Aronofsky paints an accurate picture of the logical outworking of radical environmentalism.  The scene of Noah climbing the ladder and walking along the top of the ark with the look of a crazed madman with a knife in hand to kill his grand-daughters is an insight into the dark thoughts of some radical environmentalists.



Noah's apparent 180 with regards to the preservation of mankind is not only unbiblical, but it doesn't even make sense within the context of the film.  Noah sees the wickedness of man and recognizes it in both himself and each of his individual family members and without much explanation this leads him to decide God wants the human race to end with them, and it is Noah's duty to kill anyone who may foil "God's plan" - even if they are his own grandchildren.

This creates the major theological issue discussed earlier - that God, as depicted in the movie, has apparently left judgement and mercy both in the hands of Noah and is taking a "hands off" approach to the whole ordeal.  When Noah spares his grand-daughters, he believes he is going against God's will.  This problem is apparently resolved when his daughter-in-law explains to him that when God chose Noah to build the ark, He was also choosing him to decide whether or not to destroy mankind or to let it continue.  In Scripture we see something quite to the contrary.  God chose Noah because he was a just and righteous man.  God instructed Noah to bring his sons and their wives onto the ark, and the first instruction He gives them when they leave the ark is to "be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth." (Genesis 9:1 and similarly in Genesis 9:7).   So we see that it was God's plan from the start for Noah and his family to be saved and to continue to procreate.  Nowhere in Scripture do we see the idea that God created the earth to be free of mankind.  Though a popular idea in some circles, it is strictly anti-biblical.

When we exchange the truth of God's plan for mankind with the lie of population control we get ugly things like "gendercide".  It is only too common in India, China and becoming more common here in North America and was depicted in the film when Noah planned to kill his grandchildren only if they were girls.   Having recently known the joy of birthing a baby girl, we cannot imagine the pain which endures in cultures where the knowledge that one is carrying a girl may be the worst thing you could hear - because it means your daughter will be murdered before she's born (or shortly after).  Anyone who was disturbed by the film Noah's decision to murder his grandchildren because they are girls, but supports abortion, should question why they support a form of execution which has been the tool of choice in the capital punishment of well over 100 million (The Economist, March 2010) baby girls whose only crime was to be a girl. The term capital punishment is used intentionally, though loosely, because in almost all cases, the state condones the execution.  (This also applies to feminists who support abortion - you can't support the abortion of babies but not support the abortion of girl babies - it just doesn't make sense.  If you think otherwise, please try to make a coherent argument for it in the comments.)

While we're on the topic of women, just note that throughout the film it is the women who consistently are the most compassionate, wise, and insightful characters.  We believe, of course, that women can be all these things - but so can men.  Could this be another subtle attempt within the feminist agenda to discredit men as foolish, crazy or unfeeling?  (Read this.)

You've probably already heard about the rock watchers... Some are saying they are inspired by the "sons of God" or the "giants" from Genesis 6, but really we don't see angels encased in rock anywhere in Scripture. More so, the whole idea that God would use disobedient angels to save mankind (and then forgive and redeem them) is contradictory to what we know of God's dealing with men and angels.

We could spend all night listing inaccuracies but here are a few more:
1. There was no need for numerous animals of the same kind to be on the ark, because natural selection gives us all the different species in a specific kind. Can a reasonable engineer, mathematician, or zoologist believe that all the animals we see in the world today could have come from ancestors that together fit in the ark?  Yes!
2. There were 8 people who entered the ark - Noah and his wife and his three sons and their wives - and Noah was clearly instructed to bring them.
3. Though it is true that men did not eat meat before the flood, the movie failed to show that God allowed them to eat meat after the flood - he did not expect them to be perpetual vegetarians.

The one major thing we feel was done well is that the depravity of mankind was clearly displayed.  Man sinned in the garden, choosing his own ways over God's ways.  This led to toil, pain, death and murder, to the point where "every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually."  (Genesis 6:5) In the movie girls are sold for food.  This is the kind of world that God in His justice chose to destroy.  We also see that even after the flood, sin was still in the world - as it is today.  You only have to read a few verses after the flood has ended to see Noah's drunkenness and Ham's wrongdoing.  Again, what the movie fails to show is God's redemptive power in the face of such wickedness.

Two BAD Reasons to See the Noah Movie 

"A secular studio has spent hundreds of millions of dollars telling a Bible story - we should support them!" But if they butcher the plot, twist the characters, and make a heresy of God, the hundreds of millions of dollars were spent in deceiving millions of people.  Support studios that make Christian films which are true to the Bible.

"You need to see it so you'll have a conversation starter with unsaved friends."  Here's a better way you can start a conversation with unsaved friends: like Noah, live a life of radical righteousness.  Show Christlike love to your wife.  Respect and honour your husband.  Raise your children in the fear and admonition of the Lord.  Take care of the poor and needy in your community.  Love your enemies.  These sort of counter-cultural actions, done in obedience and out of love for Christ, will give you ample opportunities to explain why you do what you do.

In Conclusion

The sad thing is that this movie had great potential.  A talented cast and team coupled with a truly great, moving, and awesome true story can make for a potent combination.  It was sad to leave the theater knowing that such an opportunity had been missed.

We don't recommend the film.  But we pray that God will raise up men and women who will take dominion even over the film industry - using it as a tool to bring glory to God and shine forth the truth of Scripture and the gospel to many.

1 out of 4 stars from the Who Can Stand movie critics.  Don't waste your money on this.


post signature

We also recommend reading The Bigger Problem with the Noah Movie by Growing Home.

(Linked up at Growing HomeThe Modest Mom, Raising Homemakers, Walking RedeemedRaising Arrows, Raising Mighty Arrows, and Graced Simplicity, Thrive @ Home, Serving Joyfully)

23 comments:

  1. Any idea WHY fellow Christians are seeing this and recommending it? I have no interest in actually watching it (most movies aren't worth my time, I've found) but frankly, I am so confused by the feedback on this one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Schwarzen Family your comment made me laugh - I wish that's how all Christians saw it. It seems to be based on one or two of the BAD reasons we mentioned above.

      Delete
  2. Every word of God is pure. Therefore as far as I am concerned it should never to altered or turned into entertainment. I also write briefly about this today and I agree with you. Not going to waste 2 hours on seeing it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. THANK YOU for standing firm for God and the accuracy of His Word! We are so appalled at the apathy among the Christian community. Our hearts are heavily burdened as we hear of the contents of this movie, but the thing that weighs even heavier is that Christians are supporting it, condoning it, and even promoting it. We so appreciate you telling the truth and being faithful to your calling. :) This is my first time here...I found you on the Growing Home Link-up. God bless you!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You've voiced our thoughts exactly, Cheryl. Thanks for stopping by - we hope to hear more of our wisdom in the future!

      Delete
  4. Thank you for exposing this film for what it is......we Christians tend to be too timid, too afraid of offending, and too uncaring to take a stand for righteousness' sake. There has been such a weakening of the Christian church by the same type of apathy that is being displayed by so many Christians over such movies as this one. We don't need to see such a movie to know it is wrong, we don't need to give satan any chance to influence us. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your encouragement, gentlejoy! I too struggle with not wanting to offend, but we must serve God not man, and we try to do that with love and gentleness towards our fellow brothers and sisters in Christ. We hope our review, and others out there, will help Christians choose NOT to see the movie.

      Delete
  5. I haven't seen the movie or read any reviews, but I've got to say that when Hollywood comes out with a movie, whether it's a take on a Biblical story or not, I'd never ever expect it to hold firm to what the Bible says happened. I am a Christian, but I'm also a realist. I cannot expect Hollywood, who makes money from entertainment, to base a movie on Scripture alone. Sadly, very sadly, I don't think they'd make as much money that way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You're right Jelli. And until the rest of the Christian community understands that too, Hollywood will likely continue to capitalize on making quasi-biblical movies just to get in our wallets!

      Delete
    2. I said the same thing when I started hearing about the movie. As a Christian, I know that "blockbuster Hollywood" has no interest in promoting God or the Bible--if anything they promote tearing down all Biblical morality--and would only do something that would sell movies.

      Delete
  6. More Jewish trash fromJewish Hollywood. Darren Aronofsky is a Jew, so this is no surprise, coming from an anti-Christ. They feed the masses trash in Hollywood and are also behind the porn industry.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jesus Christ came to save both Jew and Gentile. Without repenting and turning to Christ, each one of us is a god hater, desperately wicked. When we turn there is forgiveness for both Jew and Gentile. The real problem with Aronofsky is that he is an atheist who is out to create "the least biblical film ever made." -Andrew

      Delete
    2. I agree with you Andrew, however, Jews are very much over-represented in these areas of corruption in America, and it is very intentional. If you study history, they have done this for hundreds of years and have been expelled from over 100 countries for these very reasons, along with establishing private central banks and making their living on usuary (Federal Reserve Bank in the USA). They also own almost all of the media.

      Delete
    3. Is it possible that the character traits of being disciplined and hard-working would propel a person, or a group of people, to the top of any industry, whatever the aims of that industry? Some industries are bad, and some are ugly, but there are many industries that are good and beautiful. In the engineering and Christian volunteer circles I run in, people with a Jewish heritage have been some of the most productive and hardest working of anybody. Those with Jewish heritage have often been at the top of medical and scientific fields. Is it possible that some see a correlation between ancestry at the top of a field they disagree with and confuse it with a negative cause-effect relationship?

      Delete
    4. WOW... I wasn't aware that Jews were "anti-Christs" for starters. As someone who is non-religious... I don't see how any of these comments should be an opinion on the religion of those who made the movie. I am sure lots of "non-jews" were involved in the film... and likely a number or Christians. Just because a movie is based off of an historical event that ALSO happened to be in the Bible (since there is proof of an epic flood), it doesn't mean they aren't allowed to have their own interpretation of it.

      If you are taking every word to be literal that is written in the Bible, then you are really only getting one side of the story. That of the writer, who for the record was not God, but a man. It's entirely possible that if Noah were a real man way back when that he wasn't this infallible righteous person at all times, perhaps Aronovsky was just showing another side or interpretation and showing some insight into the mind of a man who was under a great deal of pressure and questioning his own convictions. Anti-semitism isn't really a great way to encourage people not to watch an "un-Christian" film. I came on here to read product reviews and fell into this not so wonderful back and forth.

      As for the abortion topic... not sure how that fits into this movie review... but kudos for drumming up a whole lot of controversy over something that was not at all necessary. If you can't see how feminists can support abortion, but not gender selection I think you're seeing the world from a very skewed stance. I don't know of any women who feel that gender selection (male or female) is an acceptable practice, yet support abortions for women who choose to have them, myself included.I would not personally have an abortion, but can completely understand the reasoning behind it. I think I will go and watch Noah - the Biblically inaccurate Hollywood blockbuster in spite of this review. Just because something isn't Christian, does not mean it does not have value.

      Delete
  7. I also appreciate your critical review of this movie. Movieguide.org, which is supposed to be Christian, does not give the excellent cautions you give and warn against it. They are sold out to the establishment, in my opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many other "evangelical" publications also seem to be dazzled, and forgetting a Christian worldview on this movie, including Focus on the Family, and World Magazine. - Andrew

      Delete
  8. The argument you asked for in your post (and I am deeply surprised that anyone would think there was a logical inconsistency here) is thus:
    1. Feminists 'support' abortion, or rather, support women's right to choose whether or not they take a pregnancy to full term, because they do not support the patriarchy which dictates that men have any say in how a woman determines her own life
    2. Since the ideas which support the selective abortion of baby girls are patriarchal (seeing the worth of women as being less than that of men) feminists do not support the selective abortion of baby girls based solely on the fact that the baby is a girl.
    This is the logical argument. And, incidentally, I am a woman and I have a degree, (or to be more accurate, three degrees). And the fact that women could fail to believe in the equal rights and opportunities of women is still a constant source of amazement to me.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Helen,
      Thanks for sharing your argument - there are some new ideas to me there! You seem to say that every feminist's reason for supporting abortion is simply in opposition to the patriarchy - but it seems like there are many different reasons why women support abortion and so your argument addresses only a specific subset. As well, it seems inconsistent that these feminists are against their lives being "controlled" by men, but are ready to take the life or death decision of another person (an unborn baby) into their own hands.

      With regards to your second point - what happens if the woman herself is choosing to abort her baby based on it's gender? Do the feminists you speak of still oppose it? Does she no longer have the "right to choose"?

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. Hi Stephanie,
      I appreciate your thoughts and that you promote discussion around these topics. I agree that there are many and varied reasons a woman may choose abortion. However, since a feminist is 'a person dedicated to defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women', most feminists see the availability of medically safe (or as safe as current technologies allow) abortions as a manifestation of a woman's social rights. As to the question of whether feminists would object if a woman herself selected to abort a child because it was female - while I can't speak for all non-partisan feminists, I think in this light we would 1.) Uphold her right to access a safe abortion, as that is her social right, but 2.) Oppose and counter the patriarchal influence which causes women to make such decisions based solely on a negative gender bias.
      Both 1.) and 2.) uphold root tenants of feminism, which are to give women equal access to all rights and to counter negative gender biases and stereotypes. Your comment does help to highlight that patriarchy, combined with the current status quo -where women may access some rights but not others- may put some women in a rather difficult position of being able to access an abortion but still choosing it for the wrong reasons.

      Delete
  9. I had a (very brief) interest in seeing this movie until I heard that the producer was bragging that this was the least biblically accurate film ever made. For some it is just so much their life's goal to make Christianity (and/or the Bible) look foolish. Pray for those who persecute you. Remember those are God's words? I just got convicted there a bit. We need to pray for all the people involved in this film. Could you imagine the good they would do for His Kingdom IF they repented and worked for the glory of God? Thanks for this post.

    ReplyDelete