Tuesday, March 25, 2014

A "Flood" of Misinformation!

     Just when I thought people couldn’t get much goofier! Now we will be treated over the next weeks to both Fundamentalists and other Christians/non-Christians providing the producers with much needed free publicity regarding the, soon to hit a theater near you, film “Noah.”

     Muslims are pissed, because of a fact the vast majority of Christians don’t know, which is that the Qur’an  considers Noah as a prophet, and making images of prophets for profits (or any other reason) is forbidden. So some Muslim nations have banned the film. So, do ya still want to live in a theocracy?

     Fundamentalist Christians are pissed because they say the producers filled the film with inaccuracies. Back away and consider the nature of that statement. This is essentially saying that this oral history, no more or less than any other civilization’s creation/annihilation story, which has been dated differently  every time geology proves the previous version impossible, has details which can be classified  “right” or “wrong.” 
For Fundamentalists, the story is word for word as described in whatever version of the Bible they are currently using. Scientific contradictions (and they are legion) aside, they subscribe, similarly to Muslims insistence on the immutability of the Qur’an,  to the belief that the Bible constitutes nothing less than the immutable,  literal word of God.  If the Bible said Noah saved the animals (and himself and his family and 76 other righteous persons  (most of you never heard of them, either huh?) in the trunk of a 1948 Packard, it has to be regarded as divinely revealed truth.

     In reality, which never seems to infringe on the mythology of Fundamentalist Christians, The Genesis flood narrative is one of a number of similar flood myths. Many scholars believe that the Noah story and the Biblical Flood story are derived from the Mesopotamian versions, predominantly because Biblical mythology that is today found in Judaism, Christianity, Islam and Mandeanism shares overlapping consistency with far older written Mesopotamian stories of The Great Flood, and that some of the early Hebrews were believed to have lived in Mesopotamia, for example during the Babylonian captivity. The earliest written flood myth is the Sumerian flood myth found in the 'Epic of Ziusudra’.  Later and very similar Mesopotamian flood stories are found in the Epic of Atrahasis and Epic of Gilgamesh texts.

     What the vast percentage of modern theologians except for  reality  challenged Fundamentalists now believe is that just like almost every Bible story, including many of the New testament, the Flood story is allegorical in nature.  Thomas Jefferson calculated that there could never be sufficient water to actually “cover the world with water.”  I mentioned this to a semi-relative who immediately said that all the extra water was contained in a globe of water called the “firmament” which God had placed around the earth (just in case he needed it, I suppose) I then asked the logical question, “If that were so, how did sunlight get through to make the trees grow so Noah could build the ark?” Silence.

     Reality poses far simpler solutions. The Tigris and Euphrates rivers have between them  lands which have been, for thousands of years, subject to flooding when the snow melt in the Turkish mountains combines with spring rains. This is mirrored in the Mississippi/Missouri system in North America.  For civilizations in the fertile crescent (modern day Iraq, where Noah would have lived), large floods were common, but a “1000 year” flood would appear to residents to be the entire world covered with water. Even the Missippi system, with all the flood control measures in place, neared 40 miles in width during the worst floods, and that was in the late 20th century. Small wonder that Neolithic herdsmen, who probably travelled less than ten miles from their home lands during their lives thought the world was covered with water, because to their limited understanding, it was! Of course what is missing from the region, at least today, are the forests capable of producing the sort of timbers necessary to build the Ark to biblical specs. 

     Other problems include the distribution of species. If you are a Fundamentalist, then based on the Creationist “manifesto” you must believe that Noah wrangled T-Rexs, Polar Bears, and all the North American fauna (which never existed in the fertile crescent) across the Atlantic and into the ark. Based on the 150 days of rain and 220 days of drying version, he also must have been towing a prodigious barge filled with food.

     One more issue is simple biology. In the most restrictive version, all of Noah’s  issue after the flood were the products of second degree incest (at best). If all the “Arkians” were Noah and his peers, there is no explanation for the proliferation of human races today. In other words, a literal Flood Story interpretation has more holes than a tennis racket, so to lambast it based on “inaccuracies” is sheer insanity.  

     As a rational believer in Geology, Archeology and Anthropology, there are also reasons to criticize the film. Availability of wood is a first problem, although not insurmountable, until you consider that Noah and his immediate family couldn’t possibly really lived long enough to obtain the wood and do the construction. And, please don’t give me that bullshit about Methuselah and the other alleged long lived patriarchs in period when any infection was a potential death sentence, not to mention that every single human remain from the period has shown 40 as an advanced age. 
    
     An even better reason is the appearance of the principals in the movie. Just like “Son of God”, which features “Sven Christ” (my obviously ironic reference to the Scandinavian looking six foot two male model  playing Jesus) in a period when the average  man was lucky to hit 5 foot 6 inches (again, by actual remains). If “Son of God” is accurate, Jesus and the Apostles would have looked like the LA Lakers compared to the rest of the residents of Galilee. In like manner, Emma Watson, the divine Hermione Granger, a far more realistic casting, bears zero resemblance to even any current resident of the region, let alone a contemporaneous one.

      The final straw is tidal waves and water spontaneously shooting up from the ground in geysers, rather than simply raining down. Clearly this is a gross contradiction to the Bible version, and is reminiscent of the artistic license taken by the producers of “2012” and others of the slew of fictionalized apocalyptic films in vogue.  

     Debating the “realism” or “accuracy” of Biblical allegory (at best, fiction more likely)  is reminiscent of the recent tempest in a teapot when Faux News talking heads debated the ethnicity of Santa Claus!

If the film were to be realistic, you’d have Noah portrayed by Shelley Berman, with his sons, Shecky/ Richard Belzer,  Morty/Jackie Mason, and  Moshe/Gene Wilder with their wives,  Bea Arthur, Linda Lavin, and Barbra Streisand. Now that, I’d pay to see!  

No comments:

Post a Comment