The movie “Noah” has brought along with it much discussion; primarily because it had nothing to do with Noah. It did, however, have much to do with Gnosticism, the New Age (by any other name), Kabbalah, etc.
In fact, last year we wrote an article about something that ended up coming up in the movie; Were Adam and Eve beings of light?
Well, one issue that came up was brought about via the comments section on a certain website. We will consider the short discussion between me and a person whom we will call “Joe: “.”
“I find it hilarious how so many people are so riled up about this film. You guys do realize it (i.e., Noah and the flood) is a fictional story, right? It never actually happened.”
“You just made the positive affirmation that ‘Noah and the flood’ ‘is a fictional story’ and ‘never actually happened.’
Please prove it.
Moreover, you assert that it is “hilarious” that “so many people are so riled up about this film” which depicts that which, in your view, is fiction. Now, since according to you Noah and the flood is fictional why are you riled up enough to log in, and comment about it to the WORLD WIDE web?”
“Hi Ken – Sorry, but I can’t prove the flood didn’t happen any more than you can prove that Earth wasn’t visited by extraterrestrials in the early 1600s. It’s up to the person making the positive claim (i.e., something DID happen) to prove it. And there’s absolutely no evidence for the global flood described in Genesis.”
“Thanks for getting back to me friend.
Do not disregard the fact that you positively affirmed your knowledge of the fact that it did not happen. If you think that it has not been proved then you should simply state as much and leave it at that. When you make a positive affirmation to knowledge then you will be expected to prove your claims.
So, 1) why are you riled up about it and 2) what would you consider evidence of a worldwide flood?”
“We have very solid research on the geological history of Earth. Nowhere in the record is there any indication of a global flood. While absence of evidence does not always equate with absence of evidence, our knowledge in this area is sufficient to support the claim.
Thus my positive affirmation of the nature of the flood myth. Now, all you or anyone else has to do is to find such physical evidence and we will re-evaluate. Many awards await… [ellipses in original]
I’m not riled up. I simply find this whole topic amusing. Probably in much the same way you might be amused at people who vigorously debate Star Trek hypotheticals (assuming you’re not a Trekkie yourself of course).”
“YOU FAIL my friend; there are people who go to Star Trek camp to learn to speak Klingon…and stuff ;o)
Well, if you are not riled up then neither are people who take umbrage at having their sacred text misrepresented. But then again, you are posting to the entire world. But fine, let us let that one go.
I asked what you would consider evidence and you did not reply on that point except to say that I should “find such physical evidence” but for what are you looking evidencewise?
We have very solid research on the geological history of Earth and we are literally drowning in evidence of the flood. Moreover, if I may employ a quip: if a worldwide flood occurred what would we expect to find? Millions of dead thing, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the Earth. And what do we find? Millions of dead thing, buried in rock layers, laid down by water, all over the Earth.
Moreover, on a history point we find another line of evidence. You mention the ‘flood myth’ and it is a fact that separate cultures all over the planet contain, within their most ancient myths, legends, histories similar tales of a worldwide flood.”
Note that I was still asking for what he considered evidence. This is important because you could waste a lot of time providing evidence which the person will just reject out of hand. So, it is important to find their parameters first and shoot for something that will fit therein. You can also begin by challenging their parameters in the first place. I decided to throw in some info so that he could get an idea as to where I was headed.
In any regard, the discussion seems to have ended in a strange way with Joe simply stating:
“Uh, good point? I should have know better. My apologies Mr…”
Well, the first part is either a question, “Uh, good point?” but may simply be a statement of fact “…good point…” with the question mark thrown in for emphasis. As to what he “should have know[n] better” about; not sure but perhaps the evidence was convincing enough.
Then he wrote “My apologies Mr…” and after “Mr” wrote the name of the original article’s name and not mine; and mind was showing up whenever I commented back to him so…I have no idea what happened.
In any case, it seems like a good example of pointing out the commentator’s fallacies, pointing out that they are doing that which they mock others for doing and asking them to set parameters.
For more relevant info see: Darren Aronofsky to follow up “Noah” movie with a movie about Muhammad
Feel free to take advantage of the free subscription to this page so that you will get an email notification when something is posted herein—see subscribe link above, next to my name…or just CTRL+F and search for “subscribe.”
Find us on: