Creationist Glenn Beck Calls Noah Film Dangerous Disinformat

A teenager's reaction:
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20140414/LIFESTYLE/304140001/-Noah-s-intense-story-will-engage-you

Quote :

www.greatfallstribune.com
'Noah's' intense story will engage you

The movie “Noah,” directed by Darren Aronofsky, is based on the story from the book of Genesis. The story is seen as a very important religious message to people all over the earth, so naturally, making a film of this nature is going to be sensitive and risky.

The story of Noah is well known but for those of who are not familiar with it, here’s a quick recap. Noah was a man of great importance to God and was chosen to carry out the task of saving all the innocent life on Earth after God has chosen to flood it to rid the world of evil. Noah then builds an ark and survives the great flood with his family and two of each innocent animal on Earth.

This film takes a new interpretation on that story, sticking to the roots, but leaving itself a bit of creative license. Given the circumstances, I’d say it was done well enough to satisfy the religious crowd as well as those who aren’t religious.

It elaborates on the details surrounding Noah and his ark, expanding on Noah’s background, the evil men of the Earth, even the fallen angels and the garden of Eden.

A lot of Act II, or the majority of the movie, is based on Noah and his family’s hardships as they build, live on and eventually get off the ark. It got surprisingly intense at times, with plenty of action.

Despite much of the criticism it has gotten, “Noah” is a decent movie with a great cast who portrayed the roles perfectly.

It stars big names such as Russell Crowe, Jennifer Connelly, Anthony Hopkins, Ray Winstone and Emma Watson.

Now some interesting information about this movie that you might enjoy. Director Darren Aronofsky decided not to use any real animals but rather computer-animated versions so they would appear how they looked at the time.

Also, this is Crowe and Connelly’s third collaboration in a feature film, and the second time they’ve played a husband and wife.

I found it interesting that not once did they refer to God by that name in the film, but instead as “The Creator.”

The overall movie experience was good, and I also really enjoyed the casting, although many of them were the director’s first choice.

Whether you’re religious or not, “Noah” is well worth your time.

Caleb Shalz is a junior at Great Falls High and a member of the Tribune’s Teen Panel.

http://www.bccatholic.ca/opinion-and-editorial/3754-would-pope-francis-give-the-noah-movie-a-thumbs-up

Quote :

Noah takes Scripture seriously and is very artful

C.S. Morrissey

Russell Crowe, star of the Noah film, attended Pope Francis’ weekly general audience in St. Peter’s Square on March 19 in Vatican City. CBS News reported that Crowe shook hands with the Pope. Crowe tweeted that he had received his blessing.

Before it happened, the media reported the event as a cheesy attempt to get a photo-op with the Pope in order to promote the Noah movie. Word was that the Vatican had declined the offer of a private screening for the Pope along with a private meeting. However, Crowe, director Darren Aronofsky, and Paramount executive Rob Moore were still hosted in the official VIP section of the general audience.

The pope gave a talk on fatherhood since the audience occurred on Father’s Day in Rome. The topic was fortuitously appropriate, since the theme of Noah’s role as an earthly father is highlighted in the film in a most beautiful way.

Crowe is not Catholic, but he was reportedly moved by the experience. About the Pope, Crowe said at the U.S. premiere of Noah: “the thing that was most significant for me was the kindness shown. We had an incredible experience. It was humbling. It was beautiful. I’ve never really felt any connection with the Pope before. This guy is different.”

It’s not the Pope’s job to review movies. But Francis has expressed a love for good films in recent interviews. No doubt for diplomatic reasons he cannot be seen as endorsing current films that are controversial or being banned in some places. Moreover, the Vatican surely wants to set no precedent that would inspire Hollywood to regularly send delegations for public relations stunts.

However, in 1995, on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of the first showing of moving pictures (by the Lumière brothers in Paris in December 1895), the Vatican did issue a list of 45 “great films.” Perhaps in 2020 the Vatican will issue another one, for the 125th anniversary. I suspect Noah will make the list.

We should not be so quick to attribute bad motives to Crowe and the filmmakers for their pilgrimage to Rome. It would be charitable to assume that they are serious human beings who, after investing a great deal of time, money, and effort into making a movie about God and humanity, about the struggle between good and evil, made a sincere religious gesture in St. Peter’s Square and lifted up their hearts to the Creator.

Even if their hearts were still full of questions about their lives, even if a bundle of mixed motives brought them to that moment, they still placed themselves into a position were they could be receptive to learning more about the grace and mercy of God. The father Noah, in their unusually thoughtful film, goes through a similar experience, as he likewise honestly acts in order to fulfill what he thinks God’s meaning for his life is.

The movie is a towering work of art that takes Scripture seriously. It implacably demands viewers to return to the text to meditate again on themes that they may not have noticed previously or contemplated adequately. Aronofsky, in an interview with Peter Chattaway, insisted that he and his co-writer/co-producer Ari Handel were faithful to the text: “we treated Genesis as the word of God, as complete truth. We were trying to bring that story to life so we didn’t want to contradict anything. We wanted to represent everything that was there and let it inspire us to tell a dramatic story with the themes and the ideas that are in there.”

Most of the reviewers of the film I have read are either insensitive to literary symbolism and thereby misunderstand or misinterpret what the film is saying, or they are mean-spirited and arrogant, criticizing the film for not being a different film, the imaginary one they themselves have never made. Two Catholic reviewers who stand opposed to the flood of negative reviews are Steven D. Greydanus and Father Robert Barron. They give intelligently positive reviews and take the film’s artistic depth and richness seriously.

Go see the film for yourself and be open to taking it as a starting point for your own contemplation of the meaning of Sacred Scripture. St. Ignatius of Loyola encouraged the sort of prayer where imaginative engagement with the text happens. Surely the greatest art will help us to do likewise.

The filmmakers of Noah have resisted the tide of stupidity that rages against integral artistic works. Those who would condemn the film as heretical should think twice about arrogating to themselves the rashly judgmental role that the Pope himself declines to play.

In his April 4 homily, the Pope spoke on the theme of persecution and noted how Christians who appoint themselves as judges of other people are frequently completely wrong about what they think they know with complete certainty:

“How is it, though, that he, who yesterday was a heretic, is today a blessed of the Church? It is because yesterday, those who had power wanted to silence him because they did not like what he was saying. Today the Church, who, thanks be to God, knows repentance, says, ‘No, this man is good!’ Moreover, he is on the way to sainthood: He is a blessed.”

C.S. Morrissey is an associate professor of philosophy at Redeemer Pacific College.

Last night I watched, “Ten Commandments,“ with Charlton Heston. I remember years ago when the movie was new, I thought it was just great. Now it seems like the producers knew very little about the Bible, or making movies.

In the Bible, Moses was a little short Jew with a speech impediment. Very different from The over six foot Charlton Heston with his booming voice. The costumes were Gold, and bright colored silks, etc…nothing like they could have had. It was funny to watch. You could see the actors doing the little tricks to up stage each other. The last scene had me rolling on the floor. Charlton Heston with a mass of white Cotton looking hair, and beard. It looked like balls of cotton.

I wonder if people of the future will see funny things about Flood?

Neither The Ten Commandments nor Noah (the title of the current film) were intended as literal reproductions.  They are more like the paintings that depict certain individuals or stories.  They are imaginative works of art that represent the interpretation of the artists who create the work.

alj wrote:

Neither The Ten Commandments nor Noah (the title of the current film) were intended as literal reproductions.  They are more like the paintings that depict certain individuals or stories.  They are imaginative works of art that represent the interpretation of the artists who create the work.

How do you know that? Did you talk to the producers, and Directors?

Judas Asparagus
 


A child was asked to write a book report on the entire Bible. 
 
I wonder how often we take for granted that children
understand  what we are teaching???
 
 Through the eyes of a child:
 
The Children's Bible in a Nutshell
 
In the beginning, which occurred near the start, there was nothing but God, darkness, and some gas.  The Bible says, 'The Lord thy God is one, but I think He must be a lot older than that.
 
Anyway, God said, 'Give me a light!' and someone did.
 
Then God made the world.
 
He split the Adam and made Eve  Adam and Eve were naked, but they weren't embarrassed because mirrors hadn't been invented yet.
 
Adam and Eve disobeyed God by eating one bad apple, so they were driven from the Garden of Eden.....Not sure what they were driven in though, because they didn't have cars.
 
Adam and Eve had a son, Cain, who hated his brother as long as he was Abel.
 
Pretty soon all of the early people died off, except for Methuselah, who lived to be like a million or something.
 
One of the next important people was Noah, who was a good guy, but one of his kids was kind of a Ham.  Noah built a large boat and put his family and some animals on it.   He asked some other people to join him, but they said they would have to take a rain check.
 
After Noah came Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.  Jacob was more famous than his brother, Esau, because Esau sold Jacob his birthmark in exchange for some pot roast.  Jacob had a son named Joseph who wore a really loud sports coat.
 
Another important Bible guy is Moses, whose real name was Charlton Heston.  Moses led the Israel Lights out of  Egypt and away from the evil Pharaoh after God sent ten plagues on Pharaoh's people.  These plagues included frogs, mice, lice, bowels, and no cable.

 God fed the Israel Lights every day with manicotti.  Then he gave them His Top Ten  Commandments. These include: don't lie, cheat, smoke, dance, or covet your neighbor's stuff.
Oh, yeah, I just thought of one more: Humor thy father and thy mother.
 
One of Moses' best helpers was Joshua who was the first Bible guy to use spies.  Joshua fought the battle of Geritol and the fence fell over on the town.
 
After Joshua came David.  He got to be king by killing a giant with a slingshot.  He had a son named Solomon who had about 300 wives and 500 porcupines.  My teacher says he was wise, but that doesn't sound very wise to me.
 
After Solomon there were a bunch of major league prophets.  One of these was Jonah, who was swallowed by a big whale and then barfed up on the shore.
 
There were also some minor league prophets, but I guess we don't have to worry about them.
 
After the Old Testament came the New Testament.  Jesus is the star of The New.  He was born   in  Bethlehem  in a barn.  (I wish I had been born in a barn too, because my mom is always saying to me, 'Close the door! Were you born in a barn?' It would be nice to say, 'As a matter of fact, I was.')
During His life, Jesus had many arguments with sinners like the Pharisees, the Democrats, and the Republicans.
 
Jesus also had twelve opossums
The worst one was Judas Asparagus.  Judas was so evil that they named a terrible vegetable after him.
 
Jesus was a great man.  He healed many leopards and even preached to some Germans on the Mount.

But the Democrats, the Republicans and all those guys put Jesus on trial before Pontius the Pilot.  Pilot didn't stick up for Jesus.  He just washed his hands instead.
 
Anyways, Jesus died for our sins, then came back to life again.  He went up to Heaven but will be back at the end of the Aluminum.  His return is foretold in the book of Revolution.

Death is Certain to those who Mock God-Jesus Christ

Posted in Reality by Sam Jacob
Did You Know These Facts? I Sure Didn’t Till Now

Death is certain but the Bible speaks about untimely death! Make a personal reflection about this…..
Very interesting, read until the end….. It is written in the Bible (Galatians 6:7): “Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.

Here are some men and women who mocked God :

John Lennon (Singer):
Some years before, during his interview with an American Magazine, he said: “Christianity will end, it will disappear. I do not have to argue about that. I am certain. Jesus was ok, but his subjects were too simple, Today we are more famous than Him” (1966).
Lennon, after saying that the Beatles were more famous than Jesus Christ, was shot six times.

Tancredo Neves (President of Brazil ):
During the Presidential campaign, he said if he got 500,000 votes from his party, not even God would remove him from Presidency.
Sure he got the votes, but he got sick a day before being made President, then he died .

Cazuza (Bi-sexual Brazilian composer, singer and poet):
During A show in Canecio (Rio de Janeiro ), while smoking his cigarette, he puffed out some smoke into the air and said: “God, that’s for you.”
He died at the age of 32 of AIDS in a horrible manner.

The man who built the Titanic
After the construction of Titanic, a reporter asked him how safe the Titanic would be. With an ironic tone he said: “Not even God can sink it”
The result: I think you all know what happened to the Titanic .

Marilyn Monroe (Actress)
She was visited by Billy Graham during a presentation of a show. He said the Spirit of God had sent him to preach to her. After hearing what the Preacher had to say, she said: “I don’t need your Jesus”.
A week later, she was found dead in her apartment .

Bon Scott (Singer)
The ex-vocalist of the AC/DC. On one of his 1979 songs he sang: “Don’t stop me, I’m going down all the way, down the highway to hell”.
On the 19th of February 1980, Bon Scott was found dead, he had been choked by his own vomit.

Campinas (IN 2005)
In Campinas, Brazil a group of friends, drunk, went to pick up a friend…..The mother accompanied her to the car and was so worried about the drunkenness of her friends and she said to the daughter holding her hand, who was already seated in the car: “My Daughter, Go With God And May He Protect You..” She responded: “Only If He (God) Travels In The Trunk, Cause Inside Here…..It’s Already Full ”
Hours later, news came by that they had been involved in a fatal accident, everyone had died, the car could not be recognized what type of car it had been, but surprisingly, the trunk was intact. The police said there was no way the trunk could have remained intact. To their surprise, inside the trunk was a crate of eggs, none was broken .

Christine Hewitt (Jamaican Journalist and entertainer) said the Bible (Word of God) was the worst book ever written.
In June 2006 she was found burnt beyond recognition in her motor vehicle.

Quote :

1 John 4:8,16 (NET)
4:8 The person who does not love does not know God, because God is love.... 16 And we have come to know and to believe the love that God has in us. God is love, and the one who resides in love resides in God, and God resides in him.

The acts above, attributed to God, do not seem to be acts of a God that is love.

alj wrote:

1 John 4:8,16 (NET)
4:8 The person who does not love does not know God, because God is love.... 16 And we have come to know and to believe the love that God has in us. God is love, and the one who resides in love resides in God, and God resides in him.

In English there is only one word for love. In Hebrew there are four; Which one are you speaking about?



EROS: this Greek word was not used in the New Testament. It refers to sexual love and probably derived its name from the mythical god of love.

STORGE: This is the type of love signifying the natural affection between kinfolk. This word appears only occasionally in the New Testament and only in compound form.
PHILEO: This Greek word for love signifies, “…spontaneous natural affection, with more feeling than reason” (Elwell, p. 1357). Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance defines phileo as, “to be a friend to…fond of an individual or object; having affection for (as denoting attachment); a matter of sentiment or feeling”.

AGAPE: This Greek word for love is by far the one that appears most frequently in the New Testament. It is, “…generally assumed to mean moral goodwill which proceeds from esteem, principle, or duty, rather than attraction or charm… [it] means to love the undeserving, despite disappointment and rejection…Though agape has more to do with moral principle than with inclination or liking, it never means the cold religious kindness shown from duty alone, as scriptural examples abundantly prove” (Elwell, p. 1357).

Nice to see you are still learning from my old posts, especially those concerning the various forms of the word "love."

Quote :

In Hebrew there are four

But, did you mean Hebrew or Greek?

Quote :

e]b]Agape[/b]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Agape (/ˈæɡəpiː/[1] or /əˈɡɑːpeɪ/; Classical Greek: ἀγάπη, agápē; Modern Greek: αγάπη IPA: [aˈɣapi]), often translated "unconditional love", is one of the Koine Greek words translated into English as love, one which became particularly appropriated in Christian theology as the love of God or Christ for humankind. In the New Testament, it refers to the covenant love of God for humans, as well as the human reciprocal love for God; the term necessarily extends to the love of one’s fellow man.

If God loves all of creation unconditionally, how can you attribute the circumstances you mentioned to being acts of a loving God?

alj wrote:

Nice to see you are still learning from my old posts, especially those concerning the various forms of the word "love."

Quote :

In Hebrew there are four

But, did you mean Hebrew or Greek?

Quote :

e]b]Agape[/b]
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Agape (/ˈæɡəpiː/[1] or /əˈɡɑːpeɪ/; Classical Greek: ἀγάπη, agápē; Modern Greek: αγάπη IPA: [aˈɣapi]), often translated "unconditional love", is one of the Koine Greek words translated into English as love, one which became particularly appropriated in Christian theology as the love of God or Christ for humankind. In the New Testament, it refers to the covenant love of God for humans, as well as the human reciprocal love for God; the term necessarily extends to the love of one’s fellow man.

If God loves all of creation unconditionally, how can you attribute the circumstances you mentioned to being acts of a loving God?

1) I have learned nothing of value from any of your post.
2) Why do you think Gods love is unconditional? Did he not kill all but 8 people at the flood. He has killed many in the Bible. If his love was unconditional, he never would have killed anybody. He also says when his son Jesus returns, he will kill every living thing on earth with fire...unconditional? I think you are the one who has learned nothing from my post.

1 John 4:8,16 (NET)
4:8 The person who does not love does not know God, because God is love[agape].... 16 And we have come to know and to believe the love that God has in us. God is love, and the one who resides in love resides in God, and God resides in him.

Agape (/ˈæɡəpiː/[1] or /əˈɡɑːpeɪ/; Classical Greek: ἀγάπη, agápē; Modern Greek: αγάπη IPA: [aˈɣapi]), often translated "unconditional love", is one of the Koine Greek words translated into English as love, one which became particularly appropriated in Christian theology as the love of God or Christ for humankind.

We have discussed and rehashed the Bible much in recent weeks.  I think most came to the realization that one cannot take the Bible literally.  Those who say they believe the Bible from cover to cover are lying.  If they truly believed everything written and tried to abide by it, they would most likely be dead for various offenses, i.e., working on Sunday among many others.
Some on this forum believe as I do that our creator, a universal intelligence that can be called God, is a God of Love.  And, according to the Bible, we are his children.  Any parent would not do harm to their children.  Unconditional love is simply that.  As for coincidences, they are simply that and cannot be proved otherwise.
 
If anyone wants to believe in a God of hate/wrath and a God that intends to kill his creation, continue to believe that and it shall come to pass.  For those who believe in a God of love and one of compassion, they can live a life free of fear.  I don’t fear God and I don’t fear death.  That is my personal belief and don’t expect others to agree.  Don’t even try to change my view on this matter since there is no valid argument or quoting scripture that would change my view.  My relationship with my maker is personal.  I know what I know.  What I don’t know doesn’t bother me.  The people who know are dead.  Since we will all die, we will eventually have that knowledge.  Since energy never dies, we will continue living in an exciting new dimension.

Abe F. March wrote:

We have discussed and rehashed the Bible much in recent weeks.  I think most came to the realization that one cannot take the Bible literally.  Those who say they believe the Bible from cover to cover are lying.  If they truly believed everything written and tried to abide by it, they would most likely be dead for various offenses, i.e., working on Sunday among many others.
Some on this forum believe as I do that our creator, a universal intelligence that can be called God, is a God of Love.  And, according to the Bible, we are his children.  Any parent would not do harm to their children.  Unconditional love is simply that.  As for coincidences, they are simply that and cannot be proved otherwise.
 
If anyone wants to believe in a God of hate/wrath and a God that intends to kill his creation, continue to believe that and it shall come to pass.  For those who believe in a God of love and one of compassion, they can live a life free of fear.  I don’t fear God and I don’t fear death.  That is my personal belief and don’t expect others to agree.  Don’t even try to change my view on this matter since there is no valid argument or quoting scripture that would change my view.  My relationship with my maker is personal.  I know what I know.  What I don’t know doesn’t bother me.  The people who know are dead.  Since we will all die, we will eventually have that knowledge.  Since energy never dies, we will continue living in an exciting new dimension.

It is strange how some people claim not to believe in the Bible, but pick parts to support what they want to believe?

Here is a scripture some will believe, and some will not:




The name Pharisee means "separatist." The main tenants of this religion is that the soul will never perish and the wicked will be punished with eternal torment. In other words, they believe the lie the serpent spoke to Eve in the garden that "Ye shall not surely die."

The scribes embraced the Pharisee's religion.




It would seem that those who believe they will never die, but live on as something else, are following the religion of the Pharisee’s. It is the lie Satan told in Genesis.

Domenic,
I don't believe there is any argument that would change your views and that includes me.  As for picking scripture that suits, in that you are adept.

I agree with you, Abe.  In my pragmatic moments I look to nature to define death and see it as one organic form changing to another.  Because we have been given a mind that thinks, we try to figure out what happens to us in that change?  Are we like the leaf or do we have something special that lives on?  I truly do not know.  I do know that much has been written in that regard to provide comfort to those who need an answer.

In the meantime, I will try to live a healthy lifestyle and not learn the answer too soon.  In my most pragmatic moments I see death as sleep without dreams, a time of knowing nothing, a blank.  It's not to be feared just as we don't fear sleep but welcome it to regenerate our body.

If our Creator intended more for humanity than for the rest of the life on the earth, then maybe there is an energy or soul aspect to our humanity that has a purpose after death.  Sometimes I think so; others I think I am just influenced by those who believed so as their own comfort.

I find myself remembering an afternoon during the late 70's, and participating in a discussion in a university literature class. We were discussing the prevalent attitude of American writers during the colonial period, especially those from a Puritan background. There were comments related to the question of salvation, and to what extent one's behavior contributed to their entry into Heaven. My question, then, had more to do with the "why" of our behavior: Were we acting out of a fear of going to Hell, or from a realization of what was the right thing to do, for the sake of the entire community, rather than from the selfish perspective of one's own salvation.

I still ask the question from that perspective.

I do not believe any of that salvation stuff.  We answer for our actions in this life.  Life just is.  There are no value judgments beyond those we learn to live in society from whatever source.

Considering devastation caused by storms, these are considered by many and formerly by insurance firms as “Acts of God”.  I find it interesting that these storms frequently occur in the Bible belt.  If one believes that they are acts of God, is he sending a message?

This morning's message seemed relevant to the most recent twists to the path this thread has taken.

Quote :

www.dailyom.com

Roadmaps of Life

April 29, 2014 Information and Inspiration Roadmaps of Life by Madisyn Taylor

When we learn to attune ourselves to our inner compass we follow a map that only we can see, our own path.

All the major spiritual traditions serve the purpose of offering us a roadmap to guide us on our individual journeys to enlightenment. These roadmaps are made up of moral codes, parables, and, in some cases, detailed descriptions of mystical states. We often study the fine points of a particular ascended master’s narrative in order to better understand our own and to seek inspiration and guidance on our path. In the same way, when we plan a road trip, we carry maps and guidebooks in an effort to understand where we are going. In both cases, though, the journey has a life of its own and maps, while helpful, can only take us so far. There is just no comparison between looking at a line on a piece of paper and driving your own car down the road that line represents.

Some people seem well-suited to following maps, while others are always looking for new ways to get where they’re going. In the end, the only reliable compass is within, as every great spiritual guide will tell you. The maps and travelogues left behind by others are great blessings, full of useful information and inspiration, but they cannot take the journey for us. When it is time to merge onto the highway or pull up anchor, we are ostensibly on our own. Strange weather patterns, closed roads, and traffic jams arise in the moment, out of nowhere, and our maps cannot tell us what to do. Whether we take refuge in a motel by the side of the road, persevere and continue forward, or turn back altogether is entirely up to us.

Maps are based on observations from the past and we are living in the present, so we are the only true experts on our journey to enlightenment. We may find that the road traveled by our predecessors is now closed. We may feel called to change direction entirely so that the maps we have been carrying really no longer apply. These are the moments when we learn to attune ourselves to our inner compass, following a map that only we can see, as we make our way into the unknown territory of our own enlightenment.  

Jesus Christ called it the Holy Spirit.  Other Masters gave it different names:  The immanent face of God; the God within; the individual soul or self.

Good post, Ann.  The message is clear.  My inner compass (my gut feeling) is the one that I follow and is right for me.  Those gut feelings I interpret as prompts.  That was part of the message I related in my short story "Eternal Life - Transformation".  I believe we are prompted to do or not to do things.  Listening to those prompts is a problem for many.  Man is often too analytical and uses his mind to make judgement about what to do and ignores those inner prompts. I am happy in my beliefs and am not trying to convince anyone that my beliefs are right for them.  Sharing one's thoughts can be beneficial to those who are searching with an open mind/heart.  I feel a kinship with some on this forum whose views parallel my own.  I think we are all searching for something that will satisfy/enlighten us. 
For me, if it feels right, it is.

My ideas have changed over the years.  I do know without question that in life-threatening danger and moments of fear for myself or others,  I pray.  I pray to my image of God whether within or without. The rest is all intellectual.

Variety has come out with their picks of best 2014 movies so far.  The list includes:

Quote :

“Noah”
Suffused with all the torment, madness and hot-blooded passion you want from a proper Old Testament epic, Darren Aronofsky’s bold and singular vision of biblical times is thrilling to behold and even more thrilling to contemplate. And if it isn’t ultimately a movie to set on quite the same towering pedestal as Pasolini’s “The Gospel According to St. Matthew” (1964), it offers no less definitive proof that the most searching and dynamic spiritual art comes not from those content merely to promote Christian doctrine, but rather from those with the Jacob-like courage to wrestle it to the ground.

http://variety.com/2014/film/columns/variety-critics-pick-the-best-films-of-2014-so-far-1201243658/

Noah, was in my opinion, the worst movie of all time and considerably beneath Russell Crowes' abilities.
He was not the problem.  'The script writers were.

I found it intriguing, disturbing, and thought provoking. It was not fun to watch, but I was mesmerized by it, and continued to think about it for days. It asked more questions than it answered, and I liked it for that.

But it was not a film everyone would like.