Amanda Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Looking at Genesis 10 I'm seeing the generations from Noah... Genesis 11 however (KJV) Grandpa Harley, here is a rendition from KJV with Strong numbers... Genesis 10:5By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations. And if you look at the fable metaphorically... although I do think the fable may have been superimposed on an actual event... 1And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. I suggest, the speech of "we are the best." 2And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. 3And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter. Metaphorically speaking, they took what was man made, instead of what was God made, and "slime," what is poor in keeping cohesion instead of what would substantially hold them together. 4And 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. Let's make a monument to our name, that we are better than everyone else, and we too belong in the heavens like God, lest we be just like everyone else scattered on the earth. We're special, you see? 5And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. Children of men, NOT of God. 6And 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. 7Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. 8So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. 9Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth. God confounded their language, so that when people say they are the best, it will be called babble, and they are not special, but are scattered across the earth like the rest of us... they have NO special entrance into heaven. No one is better than another. Somehow, I don't see your apology working in this tale... basically God was scared what they could do if they worked together and decided to stop it... Right! God was against them signifying a place to represent them as being special, that they are to learn that they are just like everyone else, so he stopped their elitist mentality mission... as the fable goes... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. S. Martin Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 How can you even talk about what God believes if you don't believe God exists??? Rev R, you quoted that in your pm and called it a "trick question." Where I come from that is not a trick question. It's a logical question derived from common sense. It's designed to underscore how utterly stupid you are. First you say God doesn't exist; then you talk about what God believes. That is S-T-U-P-I-D-. In other words, it's the ultimate put-down. It's meant to trip you up, make you feel seriously ashamed, admit your error, and change your ways. Conversation will definitely stop. It's a social crisis. It remains to be seen how the victim will respond but if the person knows what's good for him/her, they will respond as described. In this case though, I don't think we are necessarily talking about what God believes since I don't think anyone can know the truth about God without proof, but more so we are talking about what Christians believe about regarding God's beliefs and pointing out the contradictions in their beliefs. Exactly! Here's my answer to the question: I'm not saying THAT God exists but IF God exists, he must be an atheist--according to your Bible. YOUR Bible claims he's the highest God. That means he can't believe in any higher God. The ancient Gnostics had higher Gods that he could have believed in if he had wanted to but he didn't want to. He denied those higher Gods so he still is an atheist. I'm sure if my sisters were the audience they would just say, "Mmm," and go do something more productive than argue with Ruby. If I put a shoe on my head they would just think I'm being silly and can't answer their question, same as we think of the Christians who come here and don't answer our questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 Wait a second? Does the Babel story say the people had different tongues, and they had only one language? Yeah! I didn't know about this particular contradiction. Gen 10:30-31 is not coherent with Gen 11:1- (to no surprise). Just when I thought I've heard every kind of Biblical contradiction there is, and here's another one. So Christians, what is the answer? Many languages or just one? Spread over the world or gathered at one place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skankboy Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Now, would you agree that it is good to agree to collectively hold some things "sacred" and have "reverence" for certain aspects in which to live our lives interactively, or not? And if so, what would be wrong with attributing that movement as having a "holy spirit," as we often attribute a strong alliance to our country as having a "patriotic spirit"? The problem with this kind of thinking is that while it is fine for symbolically minded people, most people IMOHO have a tendancy to anthropomorphize such ideas. Once you attribute human qualities to an abstract, all kinds of crap starts happening... You need only look at all the issues in the US we have today with the "Patriotic Spirit". It has essentially become a tool for conformity: "If you don't agree with us and our policies you're betraying the Patriotic Spirit". All of this points to why I, personally, try to shy away from metaphorical/symbolic language: too much baggage, too many chances for misinterpretation of intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Moderator florduh Posted March 5, 2008 Super Moderator Share Posted March 5, 2008 Now, would you agree that it is good to agree to collectively hold some things "sacred" and have "reverence" for certain aspects in which to live our lives interactively, or not? And if so, what would be wrong with attributing that movement as having a "holy spirit," as we often attribute a strong alliance to our country as having a "patriotic spirit"? The problem with this kind of thinking is that while it is fine for symbolically minded people, most people IMOHO have a tendancy to anthropomorphize such ideas. Once you attribute human qualities to an abstract, all kinds of crap starts happening... You need only look at all the issues in the US we have today with the "Patriotic Spirit". It has essentially become a tool for conformity: "If you don't agree with us and our policies you're betraying the Patriotic Spirit". All of this points to why I, personally, try to shy away from metaphorical/symbolic language: too much baggage, too many chances for misinterpretation of intent. Either that Skankboy is a genius or he has been reading my mind lately. - Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grandpa Harley Posted March 5, 2008 Share Posted March 5, 2008 Looking at Genesis 10 I'm seeing the generations from Noah... Genesis 11 however (KJV) Grandpa Harley, here is a rendition from KJV with Strong numbers... Genesis 10:5By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations. And if you look at the fable metaphorically... although I do think the fable may have been superimposed on an actual event... 1And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. I suggest, the speech of "we are the best." 2And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. 3And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter. Metaphorically speaking, they took what was man made, instead of what was God made, and "slime," what is poor in keeping cohesion instead of what would substantially hold them together. 4And 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. Let's make a monument to our name, that we are better than everyone else, and we too belong in the heavens like God, lest we be just like everyone else scattered on the earth. We're special, you see? 5And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. Children of men, NOT of God. 6And 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. 7Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech. 8So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. 9Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth. God confounded their language, so that when people say they are the best, it will be called babble, and they are not special, but are scattered across the earth like the rest of us... they have NO special entrance into heaven. No one is better than another. Somehow, I don't see your apology working in this tale... basically God was scared what they could do if they worked together and decided to stop it... Right! God was against them signifying a place to represent them as being special, that they are to learn that they are just like everyone else, so he stopped their elitist mentality mission... as the fable goes... I really don't see where your exegesis is coming from here... there is nothing to even imply what your saying is the tale... and it's clearly an interpolation since it hangs like a goitre in the middle of the Genealogy from Noah... So at the moment, what I am seeing is personal eisegesis to validate a tale where it's God being capricious, rather that egalitarian... mental Rorschachery with no more bases in object fact than this and wholly unsupported by narrative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ouroboros Posted March 5, 2008 Author Share Posted March 5, 2008 Either that Skankboy is a genius or he has been reading my mind lately. Maybe he got a hold of that telepathy machine we talked about? His reading your brainwaves through the computer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 Wait a second? Does the Babel story say the people had different tongues, and they had only one language? Yeah! I didn't know about this particular contradiction. Gen 10:30-31 is not coherent with Gen 11:1- (to no surprise). Just when I thought I've heard every kind of Biblical contradiction there is, and here's another one. So Christians, what is the answer? Many languages or just one? Spread over the world or gathered at one place? HanSolo... that was my point... they all spoke different tongues, like English, French, Italian, etc. but of one language... "We're the best" kind of language. Language and speech also means to be of one side, of one manner. Like the universal language of love is spoken without words necessarily... it is the manner in which we present ourself to another... so in those regards, tongues and language are NOT contradictory. Further, the hijacked story that the temple was distroyed and different "tongues" were created, is clearly a hijacked version - as different tongues already existed! The problem with this kind of thinking is that while it is fine for symbolically minded people, most people IMOHO have a tendancy to anthropomorphize such ideas. Once you attribute human qualities to an abstract, all kinds of crap starts happening... Skankboy, I think once you bring the genesis of an accepted approach for showing respect to others, as coming from within, instead of a mandated source from outside... one's self attains those qualities on their own. Hopefully we allow an evolution of our beliefs too, as they can probably always be improved. Perhaps there is a "spirit" of commonly accepted manners to interact with others within Buddhism? You need only look at all the issues in the US we have today with the "Patriotic Spirit". It has essentially become a tool for conformity: "If you don't agree with us and our policies you're betraying the Patriotic Spirit". Most countries probably have a patriotic spirit, and it can become a detriment in which one thinks they are better than another, just because they have the label American, French, Saudi, or whatever. However, if it is one in which the patriotic spirit is to have honor in integrity, while being humble... then there can be positive aspects too. IMO, this is the intended moral of the fable, The Temple of Babel. All of this points to why I, personally, try to shy away from metaphorical/symbolic language: too much baggage, too many chances for misinterpretation of intent. It certainly isn't for everyone... and that's good too, IMO. However, I would think that it would have to make reasonable sense to be of some benefit, if one were to use it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amanda Posted March 6, 2008 Share Posted March 6, 2008 I really don't see where your exegesis is coming from here... there is nothing to even imply what your saying is the tale... and it's clearly an interpolation since it hangs like a goitre in the middle of the Genealogy from Noah... So at the moment, what I am seeing is personal eisegesis to validate a tale where it's God being capricious, rather that egalitarian... mental Rorschachery with no more bases in object fact than this and wholly unsupported by narrative. Grandpa Harley... so what do you think the tale is? The temple fell because they tried to ascend to God, so God made them speak different tongues/languages? How do you get that? Noah's geneologies are there because chapter 10 is the next story to the ark landing where ever, and this accounts for the growth of the people population in the ongoing fables, I guess. So, there were the accounts of people forming nations and families... and their own "tongues," from their own nation. Then they met on a "plain" and decided to build a monument, temple, to rise themself up over others and make a name for them selves. What does this mean to you? They used bricks instead of stones, slime instead of mortar. Why do you think they used those analogies? Coincidence? No reason? Maybe metaphors for an underlying message? People didn't have TV or the internet... they may have thought these stories were entertaining and had some redeeming qualities and is why they lasted so long. .. However, I would like to know your interpretation of the story and to what you base it. Maybe I could see the error of my ways... and I have certainly admitted I was wrong on here in the past... so I'm all eyes, ready to read your account of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts