[The elevation of the highlands] together with greatly increased snowfall on the northern mountains caused unprecedented floods each spring throughout the Euphrates valley. The spring floods grew increasingly worse so that eventually the inhabitants of the river regions were driven to the eastern highlands. For almost a thousand years scores of cities were practically deserted because of these extensive deluges.
Nearly five thousand years later, Hebrew priests in Babylonian captivity tried to trace their lineage through Abraham back to Adam and finding the task impossible decided to flood the world for its wickedness instead and trace Abraham back to a surviving son of Noah.
Traditions of flood covering the earth are universal among cultures. But there never has been a time when the entire earth was covered with water. Hebrew priests made up the story Noah and the flood during the period of Babylonian captivity.
But there really was a man named Noah, and he really did live. The real Noah was wine maker who lived by the river and kept records of the annual flood. The real Noah brought ridicule upon himself by going up and down the river urging all houses be built of wood in the fashion of boats and that the animals be brought into the boat houses each night as flood season approached. He went to neighboring settlements every year to warn them to expect flood within so many days, and finally there came a season augmented with unusually heavy rainfall that wiped out all the houses in all the settlements except Noah's .
paper 78 violet race after the days of adam (874.8) 78:7.3
That is an interesting take. According to this, whatever contribution the Hebrew priests made to existing texts they encountered in their captivity it sure is a ripping tale. And it is better than Darren Aronofsky’s reinterpretation of the story of Noah.
Nevertheless the film is doing great although not everybody is crazy about it.
Nine Problems with Aronofsky’s "Noah" Breitbart
Twelve Things Wrong with Darren Aronofsky's 'Noah' Vice (mostly silly)
* sin of primitive fracking
* sin of overpopulation
* sin of animal cruelty
* weapons
* Noah homicidal
Viewers who are not particularly politically-minded when pursuing film entertainment are more forgiving toward insertion of leftist ecology messages and lack of Biblical fidelity.
It is fantastic mythology. Perfect for storytelling. A perfect natural for all kind of things.
Sergio Bustamante has a place in Canada Verde at Puerto Vallarta. Google Images do not show in any way what the place really looks like. It is more akin to an Escher drawing of stairs going through cubical buildings. Don't mention this to anyone, but SERGIO BUSTAMANTE DOES NOT LIKE GRINGOS. And although based out of Guadalajara has some three very nice shops in Puerto Vallarta so his art is obvious and spread all over the city.
I am amazed. Amazed I am telling you, when I hear someone say they don't notice. You cannot not notice Sergio Bustamante's art even if only there a short while and not really looking. Because it jumps out from display windows and smacks you. His favorite subjects are people and beings from myth and Noah is right up his alley. It is a perfect subject.
These photos are from a repair done to a Bustamante paper mâché. jefferymeyerart restoration
And of course pop-up books galore. It is the perfect subject for pop-uppery. You don't even have to think about that one, just do it.
Noah pop-up book, Tim Dowley
The Ark, a pop-up Matthew Reinhart. I have this one. I show it to people, they love it. Leave with people then pick it up later. They tell me they pass it around.
You can have it for 1₵ + shipping.
Noah (bible pop-up) 1 ₵
Noah's ark full of animals: a pop-up playbook 1.10 used
paper 78 violet race after the days of adam (874.8) 78:7.3
That is an interesting take. According to this, whatever contribution the Hebrew priests made to existing texts they encountered in their captivity it sure is a ripping tale. And it is better than Darren Aronofsky’s reinterpretation of the story of Noah.
Nevertheless the film is doing great although not everybody is crazy about it.
Nine Problems with Aronofsky’s "Noah" Breitbart
Twelve Things Wrong with Darren Aronofsky's 'Noah' Vice (mostly silly)
* sin of primitive fracking
* sin of overpopulation
* sin of animal cruelty
* weapons
* Noah homicidal
Viewers who are not particularly politically-minded when pursuing film entertainment are more forgiving toward insertion of leftist ecology messages and lack of Biblical fidelity.
It is fantastic mythology. Perfect for storytelling. A perfect natural for all kind of things.
Sergio Bustamante has a place in Canada Verde at Puerto Vallarta. Google Images do not show in any way what the place really looks like. It is more akin to an Escher drawing of stairs going through cubical buildings. Don't mention this to anyone, but SERGIO BUSTAMANTE DOES NOT LIKE GRINGOS. And although based out of Guadalajara has some three very nice shops in Puerto Vallarta so his art is obvious and spread all over the city.
I am amazed. Amazed I am telling you, when I hear someone say they don't notice. You cannot not notice Sergio Bustamante's art even if only there a short while and not really looking. Because it jumps out from display windows and smacks you. His favorite subjects are people and beings from myth and Noah is right up his alley. It is a perfect subject.
These photos are from a repair done to a Bustamante paper mâché. jefferymeyerart restoration
Above is a particularly beautiful Noah, I think. I admired this one in the shop. It blew my mind. The thought of it needing repair is a bummer. The Bustamante Noah I stood in awe of was quite large. The largest thing in the shop.
Below is an earlier Noah. There are other versions.
And of course pop-up books galore. It is the perfect subject for pop-uppery. You don't even have to think about that one, just do it.
Noah pop-up book, Tim Dowley
The Ark, a pop-up Matthew Reinhart. I have this one. I show it to people, they love it. Leave with people then pick it up later. They tell me they pass it around.
You can have it for 1₵ + shipping.
Noah (bible pop-up) 1 ₵
Noah's ark full of animals: a pop-up playbook 1.10 used
Homemade pop-up book
15 comments:
The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends towards unconscious coupling.
I want credit for that.
Okay.
You have credit for that. But I am confused. I came in the back and noticed 0 views 1 comment and that is quite impossible to show up on page two without passing through page one and being noticed or its summary unless you are a ghost so that proves the comment you get credit for does not exist. Too bad. Numbers are harsh mistresses.
But there really was a man named Noah, and he really did live.
He became the star of that show after Clooney left to make movies.
A lot of people forget that.
That might be because I was on sleep mode from last night. Or should I say both the computer and I were on sleep mode. I was semi conscious and the computer... well I don't know how a computer sleeps. its probably a term of art.
that guy art sure gets a lot of credit.
"Numbers are harsh mistresses."
They never sleep, constantly awake.
I wander if the California mini-quakes are a movie review.
In my mind they kind of don't go together... cleanly.
Earthquakes and Floods clash... artistically speaking.
But there never has been a time when the entire earth was covered with water.
Never had a movie cost so much only to be almost forgotten ;)
Chip:
Great post, as only you can do!
Many folks might not be aware of this, but a prevailing theory of how Scriptures came to be -- both Old and New Testament (I can't say about other world religions' Scriptures) is that many portions were the product of multiple authors, or of editors (scholars tend to call them "redactors") who knitted together multiple versions into what we know of as the first five books of the Old Testament, as well as many other books.
All this is a product of a "new" approach to Scripture study -- i.e., new circa the 1800s, and thus in comparison to what prevailed before.
There are many fascinating things that come from the various sorts of biblical "criticism" (in the sense of careful examination and study, not the sense of being negative). To put it fairly plainly, much of what is called the "historical-critical" method aims to go "behind" the text, "around" the text, and even "in front of" the text -- as opposed to simply dealing with the text as-is.
Now, all this can be very fruitful. For example, there are the interesting indications in the book of Genesis (as well as other places in the Bible) that the author (whoever he/she/they might have been) was very aware of pagan accounts of creation and of a flood, and so forth.
The problem that arises is expressed well by the saying, "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing." In this case, you have folks who take the fact that Genesis probably does refer to pagan sources to suggest that they're all the same, or that Genesis is some sort of plagiarism.
What these folks reveal by such comments is that they haven't actually read Genesis, or they did so without much attention. Because if you go further -- and learn something about those pagan sources -- what becomes crystal-clear is the difference between what Genesis says, and what those other accounts say. Whoever wrote/edited Genesis was offering a counterpoint. Indeed, the usage of this other material is rather clever. I.e., forces and mythical beings that are deemed sort-of divine in paganism are shown to be creations that are utterly dependent on God, whose infinite power infinitely exceeds that of the "godlets" (my seminary prof's term) of paganism.
Also, while obviously many people would disagree, I would argue (and the Catholic Church takes this view) that one need not take the story of Noah to be unvarnished history.
With a statement like that, we of our age like to ask certain questions: Well, was there a flood? How big was it? What about the animals? How did they do that?
But these are not questions that would interest the people who gave us Genesis. I think the author(s) would think those extremely odd questions to focus on.
Because Genesis tells the story of how the world came to be, particularly how man came to be, as we find it. Since that includes sin and pain and suffering and death, this requires some explanation, doesn't it?
Genesis also tells us that in choosing self over God, humanity charted a course away from God -- we departed Paradise -- but God nevertheless aims to bring us back. Pretty much the entire story of both Old and New Testaments is what happens as man gets farther away from the Garden -- where there is Life -- and how God works to get us back.
Finally, while the "historical-critical" approach that posits multiple sources edited by a single "redactor" is the prevailing theory -- embraced by really smart people who know way more about Scripture than I do -- it isn't the only view, and I tend to be skeptical about it. I would argue you can approach Scripture seriously and in a scholarly fashion and not accept that approach. And so would most of those scholars who embrace the multi-author theories.
From all the reviews, it sounds like Cosby did a better Noah.
And, as far as the Hebrews were concerned, the whole world was flooded. The Bible turns out to be more accurate than thought, geologists have found.
Loved the post, Chip.
We saw Noah last night. It was a terribly moving, very dramati telling of the world dark, mean, and heartless.
Aronofsky is an atheist, but that does not come through in the movie
I hope Aronofsky reads David Mamet's The Wicked Son about the Jews who've turned away.
.
The spring floods grew increasingly worse so that eventually the inhabitants of the river regions were driven to the eastern highlands.
That was before federal flood insurance.
lol rh.
The disassembled piece in the first picture puts me in mind of a nativity set.
The world was flooded out due to an evil scheme hatched by the rebbitzim? Figures.
But seriesly, that fekoktah theory comes right out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.
Very nicely put, Fr Fox
Thanks!
Post a Comment