Lurker, I’m using the edition at daat.ac.il. In which edition is this Parsha 8, and which two previous parshios does it combine? And if you had continued a little you’d have seen that it reconciles the two opinions. But even if it hadn’t, we are not free to dismiss <i>any</i> maamar chazal just because a different tanna says something else.
n0m, what do you mean, “The ma’amar is not ancient origin”? How much more ancient could it get? The source was cited in the original post that we are all discussing, and I quoted the exact language in my first comment. What more do you want? And why do you refer to Parshas Noach?
Sure there can be many lessons learned from every situation, and each person should take those most relevant to him, but when chazal say something we must pay attention to it. The first few people to respond to the original post completely dismissed it, as if it were some opinion by a modern writer who is their equal, and they can reject it at will. They can’t. What chazal say is the truth; it may not be the only truth, but it cannot be false.