Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Language and the Tower of Babel
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 76 of 95 (427821)
10-13-2007 2:53 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by simple
10-12-2007 11:34 PM


Nothing but Bable
and all sorts of imaginary things to cook up a hot core
In a planet? A hot core to start with. Little hint for you--we can tell the temperature of the earth's core, and it is slowly cooling.
In a star? Nuclear fusion. You know, how stars generate light.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by simple, posted 10-12-2007 11:34 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 2:58 AM kuresu has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 77 of 95 (427822)
10-13-2007 2:56 AM
Reply to: Message 74 by arachnophilia
10-13-2007 1:37 AM


quote:
important enough for god to mess them up.
As part of a bigger plan. Much bigger.
quote:
i'm sorry, where was jesus mentioned in this text? i see nothing that says anything like that in genesis 11. and in any case, lots of people got to heaven on their own accord before jesus. why, i can think of two of the top of my head: enoch and elijah. or, don't you read the bible?
"a. The personal character of the language (the Lord came down to see the city and the tower) indicates this may very well have been a case where God came down in the form of a man, in the Person of Jesus Christ.
b. Let Us go down is another subtle reference to the Trinity."
David Guzik's Commentary - StudyLight.org
Capice??
quote:
check the math on that again. we don't know when the "120 years" proclaimation was, but it took noah 100 of those to build the ark. the best reading is that it was 120 years until the flood.
the rest is just stuff you're making up. again.
Glad you said that, now, prove it!!! Show us it took 1000 years to build the ark!!! Busted.
quote:
...that was actually a given. "peleg" means "division." he was named for the division at babel. the 120 years stuff is just not in reference to this event.
I say it is. Deal with it. The spiritual separated from the physical is division, as well as continents seperating, languages, etc.
Support your 100 year claim here, as I call you out on it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 1:37 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 3:22 AM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 78 of 95 (427823)
10-13-2007 2:58 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by kuresu
10-13-2007 2:53 AM


Re: Nothing but Bable
Here is a hint for you, NO, you can't begin to do ANYTHING of the sort. I call you out here. Stop making claims you cannot support. Really.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by kuresu, posted 10-13-2007 2:53 AM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Vacate, posted 10-13-2007 3:48 AM simple has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 79 of 95 (427825)
10-13-2007 3:22 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by simple
10-13-2007 2:56 AM


As part of a bigger plan. Much bigger.
i love how with you nothing is as it seems.
"a. The personal character of the language (the Lord came down to see the city and the tower) indicates this may very well have been a case where God came down in the form of a man, in the Person of Jesus Christ.
so, everytime god does anything remotely physical, it's jesus? well, that's reading a whole lot into it.
I say it is. Deal with it. The spiritual separated from the physical is division, as well as continents seperating, languages, etc.
er, no, you have present evidence that the text actually means something it doesn't say instead of the rather obvious superficial reference.
we know what you think. but you have yet to present any logic or reason that anyone else should think so too -- when the alternatives are make much more sense.
Show us it took 1000 years to build the ark!!! Busted. ... Support your 100 year claim here, as I call you out on it.
quote:
Genesis 6:3 And the LORD said: 'My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for that he also is flesh; therefore shall his days be a hundred and twenty years.'
quote:
Gensis 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
quote:
Genesis 6:10 And Noah begot three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
Genesis 5:32 And Noah was five hundred years old; and Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
quote:
Genesis 7:6 And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.
a hundred years pass between the birth of shem and the flood. shem is born after the 120 years proclamation. for confirmation, check genesis 11:
quote:
Genesis 11:10 These are the generations of Shem. Shem was a hundred years old, and begot Arpachshad two years after the flood.
shem was 98 when during the flood. shem was born after the proclamation. so it took noah roughly 100 years from when he found grace in god's eyes, until the flood. this also roughly matches the 120 years.
it's the same 100 years, give or take a little where it's unspecified. i seriously fail to see how anyone could possibly read it otherwise.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 2:56 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 4:38 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4601 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 80 of 95 (427834)
10-13-2007 3:48 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by simple
10-13-2007 2:58 AM


Re: Nothing but Bable
quote:
I don't believe it is that hot. You need a big bang, and millions of years, and decay, and all sorts of imaginary things to cook up a hot core.
Kuresu writes:
In a planet? A hot core to start with. Little hint for you--we can tell the temperature of the earth's core, and it is slowly cooling.
quote:
Here is a hint for you, NO, you can't begin to do ANYTHING of the sort. I call you out here. Stop making claims you cannot support. Really.
Here is a hint for you:
Photo found here :EOS Volcanology
Now I call you out. Support your claims that we do not have a hot core. Feel free to create a new topic, it would be interesting to see how you begin to deny this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 2:58 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 2:20 PM Vacate has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 95 (427839)
10-13-2007 4:38 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by arachnophilia
10-13-2007 3:22 AM


In chapter 6, we have the warning. Later, it talks about Noah, and that he had three sons etc.
From chap 5. we see the ages of these sons. Now, can you prove that it was after the warning that Shem was born???? What really says that? The fact that it is later in the chapter alone may not do it? This is all it says in 6
8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. 9 These are the generations of Noah: Noah was a just man and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begat three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
It is not necessary to infer that all 3 sons were born after the warning, and in the same year, is it??
Edited by simple, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 3:22 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 82 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 5:09 AM simple has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 82 of 95 (427843)
10-13-2007 5:09 AM
Reply to: Message 81 by simple
10-13-2007 4:38 AM


Now, can you prove that it was after the warning that Shem was born????
i'm sorry, you'll just have to READ genesis 6, where one event happens after the other.
It is not necessary to infer that all 3 sons were born after the warning, and in the same year, is it??
it's not too important, the numbers don't match exactly. it just gives an idea of the time frame, roughly 100 years. and in any case, as i pointed out to you last time we discuss this, peleg was born more than 200 years after the decree.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 4:38 AM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 2:16 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5908 days)
Posts: 3435
From: Edmonton Alberta Canada
Joined: 08-30-2003


Message 83 of 95 (427868)
10-13-2007 9:21 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by simple
10-13-2007 2:45 AM


Re: Nothing but Babel
simple
I shall take this to a new thread since it is off topic here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 2:45 AM simple has not replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 95 (427902)
10-13-2007 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by arachnophilia
10-13-2007 5:09 AM


I did that. I guess we then have to read the previous chapter, 5, where Noah already had his sons as well. Then we read about the warning in chap 6! Then, later in 6, as well as other chapters, it recaps the bit about Noah.
Interesting.
Therefore, I see no reason why this warning was in the 5 hundreth year of the life of Noah after all. He was already 500 and had sons before the warning chapter starts.
Therefore, the exact time of the warning can't be known from this chapter. I think we could work backwards from Peleg, when the earth was divided, and get pretty close. Why not!??
Peleg was say, 101 years after the flood. That means that the warning had to be about 24 years before the flood. That means that Shem was something like about 76 years old already.
The chronology is for the birth order, therefore, not the warning time, obviously.
Unless you have some other evidence to bring to bear on the issue, we will have to have different opinions here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 5:09 AM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 3:38 PM simple has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 85 of 95 (427903)
10-13-2007 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 80 by Vacate
10-13-2007 3:48 AM


Re: Nothing but Bable
OK, I'll try. they seem to not want to allow me to do that, for some reason. The last one I proposed, they wanted to stick somewhere that no one could post on it.
We'll see how this attempt goes. If it goes through, look for a thread called
"Why the interior of the earth is cool?"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by Vacate, posted 10-13-2007 3:48 AM Vacate has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 86 of 95 (427917)
10-13-2007 3:38 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by simple
10-13-2007 2:16 PM


I did that. I guess we then have to read the previous chapter, 5, where Noah already had his sons as well. Then we read about the warning in chap 6! Then, later in 6, as well as other chapters, it recaps the bit about Noah.
it recaps it in the context of the story. genesis 5 is not in the story. but gives the age. the age of shem at the flood, and common sense confirm this.
Therefore, the exact time of the warning can't be known from this chapter. I think we could work backwards from Peleg, when the earth was divided, and get pretty close. Why not!??
because the warning very obviously states that god means to destroy mankind. not make random changes in the laws of nature. destroy mankind. you realy have to pay attention to WHAT things say. since god subsequently destroys mankind and only a few verses later, it stands to reason that that's what he was talking about.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 2:16 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 4:38 PM arachnophilia has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 87 of 95 (427930)
10-13-2007 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by arachnophilia
10-13-2007 3:38 PM


quote:
it recaps it in the context of the story. genesis 5 is not in the story. but gives the age. the age of shem at the flood, and common sense confirm this.
Chap 5 doesn't even mention the flood!
32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
That is all it says on Noah. Gotcha.
quote:
because the warning very obviously states that god means to destroy mankind. not make random changes in the laws of nature. destroy mankind. you realy have to pay attention to WHAT things say. since god subsequently destroys mankind and only a few verses later, it stands to reason that that's what he was talking about.
NOT the warning I mean! There are two. One about the flood, obviously, the other is the 120 year thing.
Nothing bout the flood at all in that. Try and pay some attention to what things say, will you??

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 3:38 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 10:05 PM simple has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1344 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 88 of 95 (427964)
10-13-2007 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by simple
10-13-2007 4:38 PM


Chap 5 doesn't even mention the flood!
32 And Noah was five hundred years old: and Noah begat Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
That is all it says on Noah. Gotcha.
yes, and chapter six which is about the flood puts that proclamation before noach has sons. chapter five is simply a genealogy and does not tell the events of noach's life. chapter six does.
NOT the warning I mean! There are two. One about the flood, obviously, the other is the 120 year thing.
...no, those are the same thing. it's 120 years until the flood. the 120 year statement refers to god destroying mankind. god destroys mankind (except noach) with the flood -- it's about the flood. get it?
you are trying to connect this to something else that you've simply made up and are butchering a fairly obvious reference to mean something it cannot. WHAT it says is IMPORTANT. you cannot ignore the statement itself.
Nothing bout the flood at all in that. Try and pay some attention to what things say, will you??
i have been. it is you who is not paying attention to what things say.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by simple, posted 10-13-2007 4:38 PM simple has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by simple, posted 10-14-2007 2:24 AM arachnophilia has replied

  
simple 
Inactive Member


Message 89 of 95 (428003)
10-14-2007 2:24 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by arachnophilia
10-13-2007 10:05 PM


quote:
yes, and chapter six which is about the flood puts that proclamation before noach has sons. chapter five is simply a genealogy and does not tell the events of noach's life. chapter six does.
Since Noah and sons were already in chapter 5, no.
quote:
...no, those are the same thing. it's 120 years until the flood. the 120 year statement refers to god destroying mankind. god destroys mankind (except noach) with the flood -- it's about the flood. get it?
False, that is pure opinion. The 120 years can't be tagged to the flood. The other warning covered that. You only assume, as I used to, that the 120 years also referred to the flood.
quote:
you are trying to connect this to something else that you've simply made up and are butchering a fairly obvious reference to mean something it cannot. WHAT it says is IMPORTANT. you cannot ignore the statement itself.
False, no more than I made up the new heavens, get a grip.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by arachnophilia, posted 10-13-2007 10:05 PM arachnophilia has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by arachnophilia, posted 10-14-2007 11:15 PM simple has replied

  
AdminPhat
Inactive Member


Message 90 of 95 (428028)
10-14-2007 7:21 AM


Topic Focus
Just a gentle reminder to all participants that this topic was started by bernerbits and is focused on the following:
Bernerbits writes:
How do you (anybody) think language and the diversity of language came about?
If humans just had big enough brains to figure out how to use their digestive and respiratory systems to convert grunts into complex communication, how do you handle the creationist attack that says this seemingly came out of nowhere?
If humans (and language) were created by God, did language naturally evolve over the course of thousands of years, or did God suddenly poof all of linguistic diversity into existence in order to thwart the pesky humans who were trying to build a skyscraper and getting too close to his front door?
If God created linguistic diversity, how do you account for the fact that language continues to evolve today and modern English is less than 1000 years old? And does that mean "universal" languages like Esperanto that try to unite people are sinful since they would be contrary to God's will?
Edited by AdminPhat, :

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024