Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Tower of Babble (a bunch of baseless babble)
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 169 of 198 (291524)
03-02-2006 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by quicksink
02-15-2002 8:31 AM


The Tower of Babel
(1). Why did they want to build a tower . ?
To focus the people on a project that would inspire them to flock together under a “One World Government”.
Same as globalization. The method now being used is “Terrorism” which will lead to the demand for the false promise of “Peace and Security” in a secular world that seeks to be free of the bonds of Jesus Christ.
(2). Why would they build a tower in the lowlands . ?
They lived there. (fertile land, with rivers, room to grow)
It was prominent there. (Same reason the twin towers were built in Manhatten and why evolutionism uses PBS)
(3). Why build a huge tower in the lowlands [except perhaps for defensive walls] where every brick had to be made from mud . ?
Ease of building wasn’t the priority . flocking the sheep together was.
(4). Why wouldn’t God laugh at the futility of his subjects?
He considered confounding them sufficient for our edification.
(5a). Why has God not responded similarly to modern skyscrapers?
The destruction of the twin towers delivered a message for the wise in heart to read.
(5b). Are we expected to believe that the pile of mud bricks was way higher?
No. The height of the proposed tower was not at issue. The intent of the tower was. Similar to the height of a man’s pride not being the problem but merely the symptom.
(6). Why would God even care . ?
If the people of Babel remained flocked together, (contrary to God’s command to Noah to disperse) then, Satan’s pathway to the destruction of all mankind would have remained paved. The division of languages produced the nations of the world. This division forced upon mankind by an act of God prevented the use of an “One World Government” for the subjugation of “all” of mankind under satanic rule as is now being done. The downside being that the world-wide communication of the gospel of Jesus Christ would be hindered. Satan, set up Rome with the intent of subjugating the world and for the purpose of quickly locating the promised crusher of his head and killing him. After Jesus rose from the dead and ascended into heaven the confounding of the languages was reversed with respect to Christianity by the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost.
(7). It's quite odd that the Chinese, in their 8000 year recorded history, failed to mention [the collapse of the tower] in any of their chronicles.
The pictograms of the Chinese people record both the ark, and tower.
(8). Perhaps they were too busy cleaning up after the global flood, which they also forgot to mention.
They were no different than mankind is today. The questioner forgot to look in the mirror and note that men are still seeking to erase the mention of the Deluge. Satan’s main purpose for evolutionism is to debunk the AV Bible with false science.
(9). Why aren't all languages spoken everywhere?
Why isn’t the same language spoken everywhere? The Bible gives you that answer straight up as I’ve pointed out. The proliferation of many distinct languages implies the ease and skill by which mankind evolved them (according to the HoE). But, no such ability is expressed today nor was there any evolutionary reason for multitudes of languages.
(10). Why did the people who got Hindi decide to move en masse to India?
They had to go somewhere. And, some people had to be the people who chose to go there.
(11). Cherokee to North America?
The nomadic people kept seeking distant lands. The city dwellers were more dominant as a people due to their innate city dweller advantages.
(12). Why did all the Hebrew speakers stick around the Middle East?
They were of the stock of Shinar peoples.
(13). How high would such a tower have to be?
High enough to be an effective govenmental project that occupied the imagination and will of the people. Similar to NASA’s pretending to aim at space travel.
(14). Could fundamentalists build one?
What is a “fundamentalist”?
(15). What about satellites, moon shots, and interplanetary missions? Haven't they already gone higher than said tower?
Yes. And, the AV Bible prophesies that man will build a space station, have orbiting sattelites, space based weapons, programmable missles, a paperless and coinless world economy and also no man will die in space unable to return for burial.
unless a creationist can prove that the tower of babble was indeed constructed, and is the origin of languages, the I take the tower of babble as proof that the bible is nothing more than fiction .
Taking this irrational position requires faith.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by quicksink, posted 02-15-2002 8:31 AM quicksink has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by ringo, posted 03-02-2006 3:31 PM Joman has replied
 Message 171 by Chiroptera, posted 03-02-2006 3:52 PM Joman has replied
 Message 175 by crashfrog, posted 03-02-2006 4:48 PM Joman has replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 172 of 198 (291536)
03-02-2006 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by ringo
03-02-2006 3:31 PM


Re: The Tower of Babel
Would you like to discuss the topic point-by-point, with specific reference to Biblical accuracy?
Of course.
Joman.
.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by ringo, posted 03-02-2006 3:31 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by ringo, posted 03-02-2006 4:26 PM Joman has replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 173 of 198 (291538)
03-02-2006 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Chiroptera
03-02-2006 3:52 PM


Re: The Tower of Babel
"Since you cannot possibly mean to say that it is irrational to express skepticism of a very extraordinary tale unless some kind of evidence is provided, I will assume that you are agreeing that the Tower of Babel story is irrational and requires faith. In addition, the preceding part of your post must be an attempt at irony."
You have assumed wrong.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Chiroptera, posted 03-02-2006 3:52 PM Chiroptera has not replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 176 of 198 (291734)
03-03-2006 8:31 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by ringo
03-02-2006 4:26 PM


Re: The Tower of Babel
Ringo writes:
This character, "Satan", that you mention... I don't see him in my copy of Genesis.
The context of any Bible verse is within the context of the whole Bible.
Rev.12:9 "And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him."
The oldest serpent known is:
Genesis 3:1-5 "Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden?
And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden:
And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die:
And the LORD God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.
And the LORD God said unto the serpent, Because thou hast done this, thou art cursed above all cattle, and above every beast of the field; upon thy belly shalt thou go, and dust shalt thou eat all the days of thy life:"
Ringo writes:
Are you using some unusual translation?
I’m using the AV Bible.
Ringo writes:
Is this an example of what I have called "twisting the Bible for your own purposes"?
I don’t know anything about the basis nor quality of your opinions.
Ringo writes:
Also, it seems odd to me that you talk about this Satan's "pathway to the destruction of all mankind". Wasn't it God who did destroy (almost) all mankind just two or three chapters earlier?
Yes.
Concerning Satan's pathway:
Mankind was commanded to .
Genesis 9:7 “ . be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.”
And .
Genesis 1:28 “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”
By remaining in the land of Shinar with the desire to .
Genesis 10:4 “ And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.”
. mankind failed to begin to do as God commanded.
Genesis 10:6 "And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do."
Note that mankind set out to begin to do their own will instead of God’s stated will. This is what put mankind in danger.
Joman writes:
... the subjugation of “all” of mankind under satanic rule as is now being done.
Ringo writes:
Once again, that is not in my Bible, nor does it seem to have anything to do with the Tower of Babel and it's historicity.
Luke 4:5 “And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.
6: And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee, and the glory of them: for that is delivered unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.
7: If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine.”
The devil possessed the power and the glory of all the kingdoms of the world and, that includes Babel.
Ringo writes:
(I noticed that you also mentioned something about "evolutionists". This topic has nothing to do with the subject of evolution. Nobody's stance on the subject of evolution has any relevance to this topic.
Quote #8 (of my post) implied that the global flood of Noah’s day should have been mentioned in the context of the tower of Babel story. I pointed out that mankind still today seeks to erase all mention of the Deluge. As an modern example of this I referred to the efforts of evolutionists to use their false science to debunk the AV Bible, which is in this context more specifically, the book of Genesis and the flood.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by ringo, posted 03-02-2006 4:26 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by ramoss, posted 03-03-2006 8:54 AM Joman has replied
 Message 180 by ringo, posted 03-03-2006 10:25 AM Joman has replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 178 of 198 (291738)
03-03-2006 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 175 by crashfrog
03-02-2006 4:48 PM


Re: The Tower of Babel
Crashfrog writes:
I don't understand the hard-on conservatives have about "One World Government." What if the government was democratic? Would that really be so bad?
One world government isn't, in and of itself, a evil thing. But, government is always a dangerous thing. Democracy provides for government by majority opinion. No matter the form of government, the danger is always; a coup d'etat. The US Constitution was designed to prevent the rule a tyrant, and/or the tyrannical rule of a branch of government. Even in the event of a well designed World Constitution the danger of a coup exists. Mankind doesn't possess the independent will, nor means to resist the will of Satan, due to his intellect and his power over the sinful nature of mankind.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by crashfrog, posted 03-02-2006 4:48 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 179 of 198 (291759)
03-03-2006 10:00 AM
Reply to: Message 177 by ramoss
03-03-2006 8:54 AM


Re: The Tower of Babeli
ramoss writes:
The 'great serpent' fits more like the levathan, rather than the snake in Genesis. From the text in Revelation, and from the text in Genesis, there is no reason to associate the 'serpent' in Genesis with the 'Great Serpent' in REvelation.
The Revelation quote...
Rev.12:9 "...that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world..."
...states directly that, the "old serpent" is called the Devil and Satan. The phrase "old serpent" derectly associates the great dragon with the serpent in the garden of Eden.
This doesn't mean that leviathan isn't another reference to Satan however.
ramoss writes:
Second of all, when it comes to the 'allegorical' matter of 'dominion' over the beasts it is more like a 'stewardship'. It is more like being a 'farmer' over fields rather than domination.
You are free to allegoricalize the subject of dominion if you want but, I find no basis for doing so.
Genesis 1:28 "And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth."
The winds and the waves obeyed Jesus of Nazareth and were subdued by his dominion over them. He cursed the olive tree and it obeyed him. When he was asked to pay a tax he received the payment from the mouth of a fish. These are examples of the reality of dominion in that an allegorical king has no real subjects nor power. And, Jesus of Nazareth is the second Adam (allegorically speaking as well as literally).
Crashfrog writes:
If you understand the Hebrew, just like the tower of babel story, you would realise it is just an allegory.. with Adam is 'everyman' and eve (which means 'life' by the way), is 'every woman'.
That there is are allegorical aspects to stories and things doesn't negate the historicity of them. The assertion that the stories are "just" allegorical lacks justification.
The Bible I use is an English one. Nothing you've stated in your post concerning the Bible requires a knowledge of the Hebrew language for comprehension or discernment.
Joman.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by ramoss, posted 03-03-2006 8:54 AM ramoss has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by purpledawn, posted 03-03-2006 11:57 AM Joman has replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 198 (291815)
03-03-2006 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by ringo
03-03-2006 10:25 AM


Re: The Tower of Babel
Joman writes:
The context of any Bible verse is within the context of the whole Bible.
Ringo writes:
If you start off with that premise, the discussion is going to become way too broad. Since these topics have a limited length (~300 posts), it would be best to limit your comments to the nearby context - i.e. Genesis.
Then you are not able to properly discuss the Bible. The reason for this is due to the fact that the book has one author. That author is the Holy Spirit. Also, private opinion and loose interpretation is avoided by allowing God to speak for himself. Like it or not the book of Revelation resolves many issues first mentioned in Genesis. What I do affirm is that my contextual use of the whole Bible will be appropriate to any debate issues. This isn't any different than the use of every resource available on the net when debating other issues. I get the impression that you perceive the need for some amount of unfair advantage on your part. Is this true?
Joman writes:
I pointed out that mankind still today seeks to erase all mention of the Deluge.
Ringo writes:
Well, all "mention" of the Deluge - at least all physical evidence of it - has been erased. There isn't any. But that's a different topic. Please stick to the Tower of Babel. There are plenty of other threads where you can discuss the flood.
The evidence of the Deluge is everywhere upon the surface of the earth and beneath. I didn't introduce the additional topic of the Deluge. But, I reserve the right to respond to such comments until a moderator says different.
Joman writes:
Note that mankind set out to begin to do their own will instead of God’s stated will. This is what put mankind in danger.
Ringo writes:
But mankind had already started out to do their own will back in the garden of Eden, when they ate from the tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. It was doing their own will that caused God to flood the earth.
This is true. How does the continuous self-will of mankind (which is contrary to God's will)throughout all of history impact this discussion? I'm the one that pointed out that man at this present hour is still seeking to attack the authenticity of the Bible. I only stated this because it established the fact that what mankind was attempting to do in the tower of Babel instance was and still is nothing new and is therefore expected of the enemies of God.
Ringo writes:
To paraphrase the question in the OP: What made the Tower of Babel special?
It's historical authenticity.
It's impact upon mankind's understanding of humanity and world view.
It's reference to todays global politics.
Ringo writes:
I should also point out that this is a science forum, not a Bible study forum (you can find that a few inches down from here). Discussions here should be about the actual evidence for the Tower of Babel - not your interpretation of the Bible.
Then why didn't you jump on the scientific aspect of my comments? Or, perhaps you should establish scientific evidence that the tower of Babel never existed. I think we should, either, have a moderator void this debate or define it's parameters, debate it (as is), or move on.
Nevertheless, my opinion is that some latitude should be allowed.
That archeaology has not found the remnants of the tower of Babel isn't debatable is it?
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by ringo, posted 03-03-2006 10:25 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by AdminJar, posted 03-03-2006 1:09 PM Joman has not replied
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 03-03-2006 1:11 PM Joman has replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 185 of 198 (291843)
03-03-2006 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by purpledawn
03-03-2006 11:57 AM


Re: A Snake is just a Snake
Joman writes:
...states directly that, the "old serpent" is called the Devil and Satan. The phrase "old serpent" derectly associates the great dragon with the serpent in the garden of Eden.
Purpledawn writes:
Just because Satan/Devil is referred to as an old dragon in a vision doesn't make the snake in Genesis Satan.
True. But, you have disregarded the clear statement made in the Revelation as to the identity of (1)the great dragon (2)the Devil and (3) Satan.
You also changed "great" to "old".
Purpledawn's Bible quote writes:
Genesis 3:1Now the serpent was more crafty than any beast of the field which the LORD God had made.
The word "crafty" is weak. "Subtle" is the more precise and deeper word. Is the distinction to slight for your discernment?
Purpledawn writes:
The serpent in Genesis is a beast of the field.
True.
Purpledawn writes:
Satan isn't mentioned until Job where he is not described as a beast of the field, but apparently a member of the heavenly household.
The point the quote from Revelation makes is that this opinion of yours is false. Satan was revealed by that quote to be (as many suspected) the old serpent who was in the garden of Eden. If all else fails you...try..the process of elimination.
That Satan isn't described as the "old serpent" in all verses referring to him is due to his many notable attributes.
Purpledawn's quote writes:
Job 1:7 The LORD said to Satan, "From where do you come ?" Then Satan answered the LORD and said, "From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it."
The AV states...
Job 1:7 "And the LORD said unto Satan, Whence comest thou? Then Satan answered the LORD, and said, From going to and fro in the earth, and from walking up and down in it."
Note the subtle lie in your version and the redundancy the lie requires?
"From roaming about on the earth and walking around on it."
"Roaming about" implies aimless wandering.
"Walking around on it" adds nothing informative and leads a reader to think that Satan isn't only aimless but, also, one who goes in circles.
God uses the English language far more precisely than you may realize.
Consider that:
"Going to and fro in the earth" and "walking up and down in it" precisely describes the orderly manner in which Satan investigates the earth for his own purposes.
"To and fro" describes a horizontal search.
"Up and Down" describes a vertical search.
Together the phrases reveal that Satan had access to all aspects of the earth.
The word "in" reveals that Satan doesn't have an outsider's viewpoint even though he's an alien to this planet.
The word "in" also reveals that Satan keeps account of the living as well as the dead.
You may not know that Satan was looking for the man whom God prophesied would be the "crusher" of his head (intellect and headship). He was led by God to suspect that Job was that man.
Purpledawn writes:
I agree with ramoss that the Ancient Dragon is probably referring to the Leviathan.
And, how will you ever be certain since it's mere opinion proposed in disregard of an clear and unambiguous scriptural statement?
And, you changed "great dragon" to "ancient dragon". There may be many ancient dragons and, one great dragon.
Purpledawn's quote writes:
Isaiah 27:1 In that day the LORD with his sore and great and strong sword shall punish leviathan the piercing serpent, even leviathan that crooked serpent; and he shall slay the dragon that is in the sea.
This scripture doesn't in any way contradict the fact that "the old serpent" is called "the Devil" and "Satan". Satan has many names. Nevertheless, he has only one hidden name that belongs only to him.
Purpledawn writes:
Given that there was roughly 700 years between the Isaiah verse and Revelation, that is a pretty old dragon. IMO, the symbolism was going for the dragon, not the snake of the garden.
Your opinion of the symbolism is unsubstantiated by any clear biblical reference. Your Isaiah quote, as well as your Job quote, fail to reveal whom leviathan is. One thing that is obvious however, is the lack of a capitalized "L" which would show that the leviathan in question is a particular person.
In contrast; the Revelation quote I used, clearly personalizes the "old serpent" as a particular person by use of the capitalized titles "Devil" and "Satan".
Purpledawn writes:
As for the Tower of Babel, is a nice story on why we all speak different languages.
Although your free to do so, if your going to be this shallow in your analysis and opinion why waste your time and others as well?
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by purpledawn, posted 03-03-2006 11:57 AM purpledawn has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by AdminJar, posted 03-03-2006 2:33 PM Joman has replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 187 of 198 (291848)
03-03-2006 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by ringo
03-03-2006 1:11 PM


Re: The Tower of Babel
Joman writes:
The evidence of the Deluge is everywhere upon the surface of the earth and beneath.
Ringo writes:
We constantly have people making that claim, but they never deliver. Please take it to an appropriate thread.
I'm sorry but I may not comment on this.
Joman writes:
what mankind was attempting to do in the tower of Babel instance was and still is nothing new and is therefore expected of the enemies of God.
Ringo writes:
The point of the thread would seem to be that the Tower of Babel was something "new" (according to the Biblical account), and therefore its story was worthy of inclusion in the Bible. We are trying to discuss what is special about the Tower - as opposed to the dozens of other ziggurats in Mesopotamia. This is not a discussion about the general condition of mankind.
Ringo writes:
What made the Tower of Babel special?
Joman writes:
It's historical authenticity.
Ringo writes:
Sure, the Tower is authenic. So are dozens of others. Why that one specifically?
It has the witness of an historical document. And, the context of the story associated with it.
Ringo writes:
And what is not historically authentic is the dispersion of peoples and the origin of languages. If you claim they are authentic, you must provide outside evidence. This is a science forum.
The evidence is in itself the origin of nations and the many languages that exist. This is the point I made that you have all been avoiding. The scientific community has no explaination for either one. For example..."What came first? The nations or the languages?
Joman writes:
... perhaps you should establish scientific evidence that the tower of Babel never existed.
Ringo writes:
But the Tower did exist. Nobody disputes that. If the specific ziggurat of Babylon has not been found (?), many others have been found.
Here you state the "tower did exist" and then question the validity of any specific proof of it.
You conclude with some vague logic that implies that, if other towers existed then the actual and specific discovery of the Tower isn't required. All the while claiming to be scientific?
The witness of the Bible is far weightier than your logic.
Ringo writes:
What you need scientific evidence for is the dispersion of peoples and the origin of langauges.
I accept the validity of the Bible as a historical document. Wherein, the dispersion of the languages and the division of the nations is clearly explained. The explaination of which there is no scientific contradiction.
You, on the otherhand have provided no competing scientific explaination for either.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by ringo, posted 03-03-2006 1:11 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by ringo, posted 03-03-2006 3:04 PM Joman has replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 188 of 198 (291850)
03-03-2006 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by AdminJar
03-03-2006 2:33 PM


Re: Really try to stay on topic, please.
AdminJar writes:
The topic relates to the Tower of Babble. Anything else like snakes and Satan and revelations is Off Topic.
If you have anything to contribute realted to the Tower of Babble, then fine. Please remember that we are in the Science forums and so some support for your position is needed.
I will comply.
Thank you.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by AdminJar, posted 03-03-2006 2:33 PM AdminJar has not replied

  
Joman
Inactive Member


Message 190 of 198 (291870)
03-03-2006 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by ringo
03-03-2006 3:04 PM


Re: The Tower of Babel
Ringo,
You do not seem to comprehend that science...Science...hasn't any explaination for the diversity of languages nor the existence of nations.
This leaves the Bible with the only written account and explanation for both. And, that testimony is without any scientific contradiction.
And that is why all of you have avoided any SCIENTIFIC discussion whatsoever concerning the evolution of languages and nations.
When you can show otherwise I'll get back with you.
Joman.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by ringo, posted 03-03-2006 3:04 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by ringo, posted 03-03-2006 3:46 PM Joman has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024