NewsHounds
We watch Fox so you don't have to!
  • Home
  • About
  • Archives
  • Forum
  • Blogroll
  • Donate
  • Shop
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
Home →

Fr. Jonathan Morris Upset That 'God' Not Mentioned In 'Noah' Movie

Posted by Priscilla -26.60pc on March 25, 2014 · Flag

The cognitive dissonance on Fox is truly amazing. It hasn't been two weeks since Andrea Tantaros, in advancing the popular Fox Muslim bashing narrative, said that Islam was "the most intolerant religion in the world" because, in part, Muslims are upset about the movie Noah which, they claim, violates the Koranic taboo against depictions of a prophet. But yesterday, in advancing the popular Fox persecuted Christian narrative, Fr. Jonathan Morris whined that the word "God" is not mentioned in the entirety of the movie. Oh, no.......

Sweet lil Christian gal, Ainsley Earhardt began her "Fight for Faith" segment with some video from the movie Noah. The chyron read "From Bible to Big Screen, Christians Question Authenticity of Noah." She reported that the movie is causing "controversy among Christians" because OMG "it doesn't use the word God" OMG "not once throughout the entire film." She asked Fr. Morris how "you make a movie about Noah, the story in the Bible about Noah, who was created by God, without mentioning God, that's like writing an American history book without mentioning George Washington."

Morris, who (according to his social media) is catching some sweet Florida sun while doing some Catholic church stuff, said that the movie uses the word "creator" but "the Bible uses the word God." Morris described the movie director's "fancy explanation" of how the movie shows the pre-flood era and as such, the word "creator" was more appropriate; but "it doesn't quite work." The chyron set the requisite Fox Controversy, "Controversial Cinema, Film Noah Never Uses the Word "God," as Morris asserted that Genesis "talks about God." (Who, in the Bible, had many names in the original Hebrew according to a Catholic website) Morris threw in a little dig at the expense of "radical environmentalists" who, according to Morris, would "hate" the word "creator" because they prefer "mother nature." ("God" has a penis. Right, padre?)

After Earhard said that, as a Christian, she was all excited about the three "great"  new Christian movies, she threw in the requisite Fox/right wing hatred of Hollywood "liberals" (in McCarthy days, "Hollywood Jews") with her question "is this Hollywood kind of copping out here, not wanting to tell the truth about this story?" (So along with Bill Hemmer, she thinks that the story of Noah is true?) The chyron continued to frame the agitprop: "Artistic License? Noah Uses Creator Instead of God."

In what could have been a subtle slam on Noah's atheist director, Morris, a fan of Hollywood, preached that if you're making a movie, you have to start with a faith perspective. He referenced how the homoerotic Christian snuff film, "The Passion of the Christ" which he "had the blessing" of working on, "was a starting point for faith." He lamented that he wasn't "feeling" that Noah had that starting point.

After Earhardt played video of the movie's director explaining his motives, Morris laughed and said he wished that those with "faith perspectives" had been consulted in the making of the movie. After praising the awesomeness of the director and actors, Morris followed with his trademark caveat - "But it's not going to work if you just try to use huge artistic license on a bible story that's very short and then try to come in somewhere in between." The chyron continued the Fox "controversy" meme:  "Film Under Fire, Scrutinized for Take on Biblical Story." His concluding remark about this blasphemous film was "it's not looking good."   

Remind me who is intolerant?

Follow @NewsHounds

Follow @NewsHoundEllen


Do you like this post?
Tweet

Showing 18 reactions



    Review the site rules
Edward Saslaw commented 2014-04-08 23:35:43 -0400 · Flag
They do know that the biblical era Jews (there were no Christians yet) did not say the name and said “adonai” instead; right?
Krystel Penner commented 2014-04-01 17:29:21 -0400 · Flag
Watch these: www.evolutionvsgod.com and www.noahthemovie.com. Two short movies that may shed some light on this.
James Perrino commented 2014-04-01 15:04:49 -0400 · Flag
HEYYY.. Everyone wake up and grow some balls and be Men and Woman.. not a bunch of Politically Correct Pussies..
James Perrino commented 2014-04-01 15:03:40 -0400 · Flag
Ohhhh I’m going to trust NewsHounds 100%.. LOL
Bemused commented 2014-03-31 03:32:00 -0400 · Flag
Couldn’t agree more Amber. Nobody should be encouraged to think that it is somehow acceptable to beat up or even kill someone else.

That’s why I place hate speech and violence in the same category. It’s one thing to disagree but quite another to express a desire for the worst to happen to another human being, especially death wishes (our own version of a “fatwa”). There’s always a risk that someone, somewhere will decide to go to the next step of physically hurting others, even killing them.

The best antidote against that is to condemn hate speak on the grounds that it is both a dangerous and cowardly weapon (because someone else will take the blame).
Amber Jimerson commented 2014-03-30 22:21:08 -0400 · Flag
Okay, somebody’s going to have to define “intolerant.”

There’s a difference between showing your disapproval through speech, even with sarcasm or anger, and showing your disapproval through protests with violence and death.
Joe DeBaun commented 2014-03-29 10:48:57 -0400 · Flag
Most people refuse to say “Christmas” anymore so I understand.
John Barnes commented 2014-03-28 11:38:20 -0400 · Flag
You are intolerant.
Bemused commented 2014-03-27 05:44:02 -0400 · Flag
Father Morris is being silly: he’s mad because the word God was not used like a punctuation mark? I mean, really, the whole film was about a Biblical story!

PS: The science of interpreting tree rings is pretty well developed nowadays and it does not corroborate any worldwide flood: only lots of small ones at different times.
Bemused commented 2014-03-27 05:37:54 -0400 · Flag
My own favourite example of what was apparently not on the ark is the duckbilled platypus.

Kirsten’s belief structure seems to be inspired by the principles of livestock breeders: unpure blood, etc. God as a human-breeder reacting to a contamination of the blood stock? Bof.
Kirsten Brothers Harrell commented 2014-03-26 21:26:08 -0400 · Flag
God was not wiping out plain sin. The Bible states that Noah was the only one perfect in His generations… meaning that his blood line had not been corrupted by nephelim blood. When the fallen angels saw the daughters of men and mated with them and created bloodlines that were not wholly human. Its easy to assume if your brain is stuck in this age..as life seems now..like all of this is a farce. In antiquity EVERYONE believed in supernatural forces…whether they were believing in the one true God..Ywhw… or believing in mythical gods created by Satan as a means of being the counterfeit god that he has always attempted to be. If you don’t believe that there is more to this life than just what your eyes can see..then ask God to show you His power…He will oblige you. Then Ywhw wiping out a humanity that had been infiltrated by unpure blood will mean something to you and start to make sense. In the end..EVERY knee will bow. Be in a loving relationship with your Creator. Even science…which people rely on far too much with all its variables shows…this Earth is not created randomly…without randomness the only thing left is that it was CREATED.
Alan Lewis commented 2014-03-26 16:10:43 -0400 · Flag
I did not realize that the Bible, as originally dictated by God, was dictated in English, allowing us to know inerrantly exactly which English word the Creator wanted to be known by.
John Robinson commented 2014-03-26 15:14:15 -0400 · Flag
No, Michelle, there is no ‘scientific evidence’ of a worldwide flood. Not just “not lots of it”, but “none”. There is lots of evidence of local floods (at least in relatively modern times), but not a single smidgeon of ‘scientific evidence’ of a worldwide flood, ever. What you are calling ‘scientific evidence of a worldwide flood’ may be evidence, and may even be ‘scientific’, but it is not evidence of a worldwide flood. Science is not a weak sort of religion; it’s a different thing and uses different rules. Unless you wish to run up against the prohibition on bearing false witness, I suggest you drop the term ‘scientific’ from your claims until you understand what science is and is not.
Michelle Clark commented 2014-03-26 13:02:10 -0400 · Flag
Actually there IS scientific evidence of a world wide flood, lots of it in fact. As for how Noah gathered all the animals when he didn’t even know they existed? Easy, God sent the animals to Noah, he didn’t go around the world collecting them. Faith is believing what your eyes can’t see and what your mind rejects……….
Joseph West commented 2014-03-26 02:03:53 -0400 · Flag
Mr Greenwood needs to realize that the Mesopotamian flood myth was actually written down more than a full millennium before the first Hebrew scribbling passed along the Noah myth. (And the earliest versions of the Epic of Gilgamesh—which also had a Noah-like flood story—were written between 4000 and 4500 years ago.

THAT is why all your bullcrap about the “Noahide laws” are still the “basis for law on earth” is the “basis.” Those “laws” PREDATE Noah. For the record, the “laws” against idolatry and blasphemy violate the basic human rights of freedom of religion and freedom of speech and the press (and most civilized countries don’t have laws against idolatry or blasphemy—only backwards thinking theocratic regimes, like Iran and Taliban-era Afghanistan do).

But it should be obvious (to everyone but the truly religious-blinded morons) that the Noah story is NOT real. The “Mountains of Ararat” (where the Ark allegedly came to rest) are NOT the highest mountains in the world (there are, in fact, mountains even higher just a couple hundreds miles to the northeast; we know them today as the Caucauses). Why didn’t the Ark come to rest on Mt Everest or K2 or any of the Himalayas (which, along with their neighboring ranges, the Tian Shan, the Karakorum and the Hindu Kush account for like 93 of the 100 highest mountains)? Mt Ararat (the most famous of the “mountains of Ararat”) rates in the 240s among the world’s highest mountains.

And, of course, that doesn’t even account for the difficulty in explaining how koalas and raccoons were UNKNOWN to the ancient Hebrews. In fact, these species were UNKNOWN to anyone outside of Australia and North America until the “Age of Exploration” began in the 1490s. Or did these species just spontaneously come into existence AFTER the Flood?

You’re welcome to believe whatever insane hogwash you wish to but that doesn’t mean it’s real or ever happened. And the Noah flood and ark are nothing more than a myth. Consider also the fact that God supposedly—according to the Bible—destroyed the world because it became evil and He wanted to basically “reset” to factory specs. BUT, if he’d destroyed all the evil and ONLY had Noah and his family left to start over with, why did evil and sin continue? I mean, why would the Ten Commandments have a bunch of “shall not”s if the flood had done its job? Why did God feel a need to “inspire” men to write about how certain acts were “abominations” if He’d rid the world of all that evil and sin with the flood? Something does not compute, Jacob.
Antoinette commented 2014-03-25 19:08:54 -0400 · Flag
Nixon trainee Ailes is known for his potty mouth, but you won’t hear a peep from this false prophet, cafeteria Catholic, so-called “priest.”

Morris is a hypocrite. Money and face-time on this fraudulent “news” outlet is more important to him, than his integrity.

All of these cafeteria Catholics should have been ex-communicated years ago. These clowns act like saints on television, but these frauds act different off-camera.

NOTE TO MORRIS

God is missing from Fox “News” Channel. Look at the behavior of some of the hosts, and staffers, and you know who we are talking about, priest.
Lakeview Greg commented 2014-03-25 14:35:21 -0400 · Flag
Oops, the father needs to brush up. Noah was not God’s child, he was a child of “the Gods” according to apocryphal writings. The two humans involved in the raising of Noah were basically foster parents. According to legend, anyway.
NewsHounds posted about Fr. Jonathan Morris Upset That 'God' Not Mentioned In 'Noah' Movie on NewsHounds' Facebook page 2014-03-25 14:30:09 -0400
Fr. Jonathan Morris Upset That 'God' Not Mentioned In 'Noah' Movie








or sign in with Facebook or email.
Follow @NewsHounds on Twitter
Subscribe with RSS


We’ve updated our Privacy Policy
Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email.
Created with NationBuilder