Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,924 Year: 4,181/9,624 Month: 1,052/974 Week: 11/368 Day: 11/11 Hour: 2/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Babel: The Mother Culture?
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 115 (365959)
11-25-2006 2:30 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Ophir
11-20-2006 4:20 PM


Biblicists claim that Babel was the mother culture. If this is the case, ancient Babylon was extraordinarily advanced for being the progenitor of the rest of the human race. Their ziggurat architecture, for example, was astonishingly complex.
Well, Babylonians were just one set of people's coming from the line of Shem. There are others, particularly in that area of the greater Mesopotamian region. As well, you aren't taking into account either Hamitic line or the Japheth's lineage. Surely, Egyptians were closely contemporaneous with Babylonians. In other words, Babylonians weren't the only advanced civilization on the block.
How could an extraordinarily advanced culture like Caral in Peru not have been aware of the uses of pottery and brick-making if they derived from the mother culture of Babel? Clearly, these skills would have been important enough in these times of sheer survival to be passed down to succeeding generations.
If the Deluge and the dispersion really happened then it makes alot of sense. Everyone on earth was once centralized in the Mesopotamian region for over a thousand years. Knowledge increased there, including astronomy and architecture until the Flood took them away. Among the preserved was Noach and his family to repopulate the earth. After the tower of Babel came the confusion of tongues and the people began to disperse. Some cultures have managed to retain their original heritage. For instance, the progenitor of Armenians was Togarmah. Armenians to this very day still regard themselves as the "House of Togarmah."
Who the progenitors of the Caral are, or for any of those from Asian descent has always been a bit cryptic. But it is typically assigned to Hamitic lineage.
Also, what was the purpose of preventing Babel from being built if the people at Caral would later do the same thing?
The significance of the story isn't found so much in the building of the Tower. The tower is just symbolic of man wanting to set himself apart from God. A physical building was never the issue.
Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus expounds on the story with this discourse:
"Now the sons of Noah were three, - Shem, Japheth, and Ham, born one hundred years before the Deluge. These first of all descended from the mountains into the plains, and fixed their habitation there; and persuaded others who were greatly afraid of the lower grounds on account of the flood, and so were very loath to come down from the higher places, to venture to follow their examples. Now the plain in which they first dwelt was called Shinar. (Shinar is the Biblical rendering of the Mesopotamian valley)
"God also commanded them to send colonies abroad, for the thorough peopling of the earth, that they might not raise seditions among themselves, but might cultivate a great part of the earth, and enjoy its fruits after a plentiful manner. But they were so ill instructed that they did not obey God; for which reason they fell into calamities, and were made sensible, by experience, of what sin they had been guilty: for when they flourished with a numerous youth, God admonished them again to send out colonies; but they, imagining the prosperity they enjoyed was not derived from the favor of God, but supposing that their own power was the proper cause of the plentiful condition they were in, did not obey him. Nay, they added to this their disobedience to the Divine will, the suspicion that they were therefore ordered to send out separate colonies, that, being divided asunder, they might the more easily be Oppressed.
Now, it was Nimrod who excited them to such an affront and contempt of God. He was the grandson of Ham, the son of Noah, a bold man, and of great strength of hand. He persuaded them not to ascribe it to God, as if it was through his means they were happy, but to believe that it was their own courage which procured that happiness. He also gradually changed the government into tyranny, seeing no other way of turning men from the fear of God, but to bring them into a constant dependence on his power. He also said he would be revenged on God, if he should have a mind to drown the world again; for that he would build a tower too high for the waters to be able to reach! and that he would avenge himself on God for destroying their forefathers !
Now the multitude were very ready to follow the determination of Nimrod, and to esteem it a piece of cowardice to submit to God; and they built a tower, neither sparing any pains, nor being in any degree negligent about the work: and, by reason of the multitude of hands employed in it, it grew very high, sooner than any one could expect; but the thickness of it was so great, and it was so strongly built, that thereby its great height seemed, upon the view, to be less than it really was. It was built of burnt brick, cemented together with mortar, made of bitumen, that it might not be liable to admit water. When God saw that they acted so madly, he did not resolve to destroy them utterly, since they were not grown wiser by the destruction of the former sinners; but he caused a tumult among them, by producing in them diverse languages, and causing that, through the multitude of those languages, they should not be able to understand one another. The place wherein they built the tower is now called Babylon, because of the confusion of that language which they readily understood before; for the Hebrews mean by the word Babel, confusion. The Sibyl also makes mention of this tower, and of the confusion of the language, when she says thus: "When all men were of one language, some of them built a high tower, as if they would thereby ascend up to heaven, but the gods sent storms of wind and overthrew the tower, and gave every one his peculiar language; and for this reason it was that the city was called Babylon." But as to the plan of Shinar, in the country of Babylonia, Hestiaeus mentions it, when he says thus: "Such of the priests as were saved, took the sacred vessels of Jupiter Enyalius, and came to Shinar of Babylonia."
" -Flavius Josephus

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Ophir, posted 11-20-2006 4:20 PM Ophir has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by anglagard, posted 11-25-2006 3:11 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 18 by iceage, posted 11-25-2006 3:42 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 19 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-25-2006 6:22 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 115 (366048)
11-26-2006 11:04 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by anglagard
11-25-2006 3:11 PM


Re: Tower of Babel - When?
If some flood is responsible for virtually all sediments, how could one locate where any Mesopotamian region was prior to the wholesale reworking of the Earth's crust? Or are you suggesting the sediments were deposited prior to any flood? Also, when was this supposed tower built? Do the pyramids pre-date or post-date the flood and tower?
I have no idea what you are asking about the sediment, but as far as the Pyramids, those were built in the postdiluvian era, however, I often wonder what this passage is referring to:
"Now this Seth, when he was brought up, and came to those years in which he could discern what was good, became a virtuous man; and as he was himself of an excellent character, so did he leave children behind him who imitated his virtues. (9) All these proved to be of good dispositions. They also inhabited the same country without dissensions, and in a happy condition, without any misfortunes falling upon them, till they died. They also were the inventors of that peculiar sort of wisdom which is concerned with the heavenly bodies, and their order. And that their inventions might not be lost before they were sufficiently known, upon Adam's prediction that the world was to be destroyed at one time by the force of fire, and at another time by the violence and quantity of water, they made two pillars, (10) the one of brick, the other of stone: they inscribed their discoveries on them both, that in case the pillar of brick should be destroyed by the flood, the pillar of stone might remain, and exhibit those discoveries to mankind; and also inform them that there was another pillar of brick erected by them. Now this remains in the land of Siriad to this day." -Flavius Josephus
Siriad is reputed as the old-world biblical name for Egypt, but I can't say for sure.
Why is the tower symbolic and the flood real? Scottness says in post 11 s/he thinks the story is literally true, there was an actual tower. Where is the dividing line between symbolic and real to YECs and who decides where it lies in this matter?
No, you misunderstood me. The Tower if Babel is real, it was actually built. I'm saying, the building of the tower has come to be symbolic of man's desire to be his own god. God didn't condemn them for making a giant ziggurat. He charged them for the intent they harbored in their heart. There really was a tower of Babel, but I'm saying the building of it is symbolic.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by anglagard, posted 11-25-2006 3:11 PM anglagard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by anglagard, posted 11-26-2006 5:25 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 115 (366057)
11-26-2006 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by Chiroptera
11-25-2006 3:21 PM


Re: Tower of Babel - When? and Where?
I mean, since the flood was global, that seems to indicate that the entire earth was inhabited. So there is no reason to believe that Noah lived in the same geographical region as Adam and Eve.
The Flood was global to destroy all life on earth, save 8 people, 2 of every unclean specie, and 7 of every clean specie. But it is entirely possible that human life extended much farther than merely the mesopotamian region.
Furthermore, the ark was floating around for about a year; wherever it started out, it could have been set down anywhere. So there is no reason to believe that the ark started or ended up in the same geographical region.
It didn't. It started somewhere in Iraq, and if not Iraq, as far as west as Canaan and as far east and Iran, possibly closer to the red sea. It ended up on Mt. Ararat, which is in modern-day Turkey.
But then the people were dispersed during the confusion of tongues -- why should we believe that the ancestors of the Hebrews were the people who stayed put?
You have to remember that we're all essentially related through Adam and Eve, even if if you don't believe in the Bible, surely you agree with that conceptually. Now, Shem was just one son that remained in that immediate are, while Ham and Japheth took to the seas and traveled tp many lands. Shem's line extends very far as well. In order to really appreciate the genealogy, you have to start at Genesis 10, otherwise known as, "the Table of Nations."
So, Eden could have been anywhere
No, the Bible clearly places it between the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers. There isn't a whole lot of mistaking where that is located. That's modern-day Iraq-- biblical Babylon.
Noah could have lived anywere
Possibly.
the ark could have rested (and Babel could have been located) anywhere.
The ark and Babel are carefully placed.
Is there really something magical about the Middle East that the most significant events in human history took place there?
Magical isn't the word. Human life began there. I'm sure you will object and tell me that it started in Kenya, or whatever, but all evidence points to the middle east.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by Chiroptera, posted 11-25-2006 3:21 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by Chiroptera, posted 11-26-2006 12:09 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 115 (366070)
11-26-2006 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by iceage
11-25-2006 3:42 PM


The significance of the story
quote:
The significance of the story isn't found so much in the building of the Tower. The tower is just symbolic of man wanting to set himself apart from God. A physical building was never the issue.
That is not what the text clearly says. What you claim is extra biblical interpretation. Nevertheless that is not what the topic is about.
Does this mean your official position is that God was mad that people made a tall building? One would wonder why He hadn't smote the builders of the Sears Tower, if that's, in fact, your official position.
The topic is about if the originating culture was so advanced why did so many cultures lose such simple but useful technology. For example, the new world people's did not yet have the wheel or arch.
What exactly was lost? http://www.ideafinder.com/history/inventions/wheel.htm
Some might argue that technology to build the pyramids have been lost, and this, taking place after the Deluge. How did that get lost by the same token?

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by iceage, posted 11-25-2006 3:42 PM iceage has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by iceage, posted 11-26-2006 1:29 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 115 (366071)
11-26-2006 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Dr Adequate
11-25-2006 6:22 PM


Archaeology
I find your statement about Egyptians puzzling. If you wish to use archaelogical evidence to prove that Babylon and Egypt were contemporaneous high cultures, which they were, then what are you going to do with the text that says that "the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech." (Gen. 11:1)
They had different languages. The archaelogical evidence shows this.
I agree that they have different languages. The whole world did have one language until the confusion. And each began to understand their own clans language. Heck, even the Akkadians, Sumerians, and Egyptians have all recorded this 'confusion' somewhere in the annals of their respective histories.

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-25-2006 6:22 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by Larni, posted 11-26-2006 2:44 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 115 (366077)
11-26-2006 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by Chiroptera
11-26-2006 12:09 PM


Re: Tower of Babel - When? and Where?
Most of this is off-topic -- I merely wrote my post to indicate that we may not even know where Babel was located, a question which itself may be only tangentially related to the OP -- so I won't waste much more bandwidth on this.
Then how did places and physical identifiers, such as, but not limited to, Ninevah, Ur, the Euphrates and the Tigris come to associate 'themselves' as the beginning of civilization? All of this was established before the Bible was ever penned. That means, there is at least some truth to it. Anyone could make the argument that the Bibles stories are exaggerations or what have you, but no one can really challenge the historicity.
Also, how is it OT? I'm just answering what people previously wrote. If I'm OT, then they were the ones that took it off course, not me. I may be taking it further off course by engaging it, but I'm merely following the dialogue. What exactly is OT though? It seems to be on target.
quote:
It [the ark] ended up on Mt. Ararat, which is in modern-day Turkey.
Now I know for a fact that most literalists, or at least most of what passes for scholarship in literalist circles, do not believe that the mountain that happens to be named Ararat in Turkey is the same Ararat mentioned in Genesis. Certainly we were so cautioned when I was a literalist.
Then where is the biblical mount Ararat located, if not in Turkey? You could make the argument that there never really was an ark to begin with, but surely you would agree that they had an actual location in mind. As well, if Babylon wasn't really in Iraq, then where was it really? Surely, they had actual places in mind.
And that is what I find problematic in this post. It seems that the interpretations are simplistic even by literalist standards.
What is so simplistic about it?

Faith is not a pathetic sentiment, but robust, vigorous confidence built on the fact that God is holy love. You cannot see Him just now, you cannot fully understand what He's doing, but you know that you know Him." -Oswald Chambers

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Chiroptera, posted 11-26-2006 12:09 PM Chiroptera has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by Chiroptera, posted 11-26-2006 1:41 PM Hyroglyphx 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