April 17, 2014
by Anthony Royle
Before I watched the film of Noah I thought the film would be a case of "this is how it really happened". I imagined that the story of Noah would be demythologized in order to rationally explain that climate change caused the flood, the flood was localised, Noah would be a religious nut who heard voices in his head to build an ark and there would be no rainbow at the end. I was wrong. Instead, what Darren Aronofsky has done is enter the realm of the "rewritten bible". Not quite technically a genre, the "rewritten bible" are works that are based upon biblical stories that are retold in a way that explains difficult passages and principles of the bible in more detail and/or presents a new theological twist to answer contemporary questions of the day. During the Intertestimental Period (Between Malachi and Matthew) many books were written in this manner. Two outstanding works of this period that deal largely with narratives from Genesis are the Book of Enoch (which the Epistle of Jude quotes from) and Jubilees. Both of these books, more so Enoch, deal with the theological implications of the flood. The film of Noah implies that it is doing the same. I wouldn"t say that the film draws from these works, apart from the focus on the Watchers rather than the Nephalim, but keeps to the general narrative of Noah with a few fundamental differences that fit the films agenda.
Not Another Hollywood hash of the Bible!
Please click here to view or download "Oh, Noah!" by Jamie Smith.
HILLSONG EMBRACES 'CHRISLAM'
When prime time Australia TV broadcasted an exposure of the financial ethics (or lack thereof) of HILLSONG, no one should have been surprised.
March 26, 2014
James Jacob Prasch
For some years Moriel has warned that World Vision is no longer, by scriptural definition, a Christian ministry that more than two decades ago abandoned its originally evangelistic ethos and become a politicized left wing social welfare organization (once a ministry or church ceases to be evangelistic it will soon cease to be scripturally Evangelical).
March 22, 2014Â
Jams Jacob PraschÂ
It was sickos like Fred Phelps preaching a mixture of half-truths and blatant lies that gave the world the ammunition to stereotype all sincere Christians who believe God's Word and trust in Jesus, His death, His Resurrection, and the certain promise of His return.
Please click hereÂ for a Polish teaching of "What is Now on the Horizon in a Church World Without David Wilkerson, Dave Hunt, and Chuck Smith".
A Move Side Ways
Ulf Eckman, the 'Kenneth Copeland of Scandinavia' has announced his conversion to Roman Catholicism.
As he has always been a propagator of error, we see no significance in his moving sideways from one school of error and deception to another. However, it will push the agenda initially commenced by Benny Hinn and former fundamentalist Jack Van Impe and Jim & Tammy Bakker, and now taken up by Kenneth Copeland at the behest of the present pope who refuses to judge homosexuality as being wrong, pushing the money preaching televangelists into league with Roman Catholicism.
The remarks of Reformed theologian Gary Burge below reflect both the presupposition error of the replacementist supercessionism that forged him theologically, and an obvious omission of examining the New Testament passages dealing with national and territorial Israel, which can only be the product of doctrinal ignorance, scholarly dishonesty, or both.
This is frankly more circumlocution.
The issue here is hermeneutics. A text, out of context, in isolation from co-text is always a pre-text.
The text of Revelation chapter 4: 9-11 does not address or relate to the issue of which sin is or is not forgivable; that diversion is alien to the context.