Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-11-2013, 11:45 AM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
Quote:The premise of the story is that all languages trace to a single point in time and space by divine fiat. There is literally no evidence for this whatsoever, but why let that worry you? Logic and reason are the devil's playthings.

I've already stated that linguists believe language originated in the fertile crescent with a few outliers (PhD's, not languages).

Quote:Do you deny:
That there is no evidence anywhere for a sudden shift in all spoken language, by people all around the world?

So you're saying that Genesis is not a reliable document? By evidence, do you mean documentary evidence from the ancients? For language can only be recorded as documents or on coinage or steles, etc.

Quote:That there is no evidence anywhere for dispersal of languages from a central point within the historical record? For assuredly the narrative occurs within historical times.

Defining "historical times" will help you and me both here. Perhaps you can tell us all about the two-four million years of pre-history from Lucy on forward and how you know that the Tower of Babel was not built at any time in history before there was an actual Babylonian empire.

Quote:That there is unbroken and continuous evidence for human habitation across the vast majority of the planet, displaying none of the upheaval we would expect would such a story have occurred?

You make it sound as if we go into ancient history we find tons of documents with dates on them, and scientists in agreement worldwide today about their dating of artifacts where dates are implied. That's what CIRCA is used for.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 12:02 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:The premise of the story is that all languages trace to a single point in time and space by divine fiat. There is literally no evidence for this whatsoever, but why let that worry you? Logic and reason are the devil's playthings.

I've already stated that linguists believe language originated in the fertile crescent with a few outliers (PhD's, not languages).

Quote:Do you deny:
That there is no evidence anywhere for a sudden shift in all spoken language, by people all around the world?

So you're saying that Genesis is not a reliable document? By evidence, do you mean documentary evidence from the ancients? For language can only be recorded as documents or on coinage or steles, etc.

Quote:That there is no evidence anywhere for dispersal of languages from a central point within the historical record? For assuredly the narrative occurs within historical times.

Defining "historical times" will help you and me both here. Perhaps you can tell us all about the two-four million years of pre-history from Lucy on forward and how you know that the Tower of Babel was not built at any time in history before there was an actual Babylonian empire.

Quote:That there is unbroken and continuous evidence for human habitation across the vast majority of the planet, displaying none of the upheaval we would expect would such a story have occurred?

You make it sound as if we go into ancient history we find tons of documents with dates on them, and scientists in agreement worldwide today about their dating of artifacts where dates are implied. That's what CIRCA is used for.

PleaseJesus...lets get back to the point and stop arguing about points no one even cares about, and don’t matter at all in any event.

Why is "God" so insecure about mankind building a small tower, when we've gone FAR beyond that, without "God" knocking over all our skyscrapers, planes, satellites, flicking people off the top of K2, destroying our observatories, knocking the International Space Station out of orbit, throwing the moonlanders back to earth destroying Voyager and Voyager 2 before they ever made it off ground? Why would "God" have been so insecure about this tiny tower, knocking it over, when we have far better than that now and he doesn’t' seem to care anymore?

And why was he so insecure back then in the first place when we are not even close to transverseing the enormity of all of "creation"? Why does any of this story make any sense for “God” to do? It doesn’t matter where language was “developed”, you’re not going to accept our points anyway, and I don’t care if you do or not because that’s not my question, and it has no effect on the purpose of my question whether language developed in that region or if it evolved across a broad spectrum for regions and peoples, and primates over hundreds of thousands, to millions of years, or if it all started in one spot, that’s not the fucking point, and the answer either way does not effect the point.

Why the fuck does “God” care? That is the question. Why did “he” care back then when what he destroyed paled in comparison to what we’ve achieved now. That’s the fucking question. Get on point!

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 02:25 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I've already stated that linguists believe language originated in the fertile crescent with a few outliers (PhD's, not languages).

You did indeed assert that.

Without any substantiation or references whatsoever.

The languages of sub-saharan Africa are entirely indigenous. The languages eg New Guinea are entirely indigenous so far as it is possible to tell.

(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  So you're saying that Genesis is not a reliable document?

Oh boy.

What do you think?

(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  By evidence, do you mean documentary evidence from the ancients? For language can only be recorded as documents or on coinage or steles, etc.

Yeah. And given that Babel happened after the flood - y'know, when all those things existed - there'd be evidence. Unless, y'know - magic a miracle.

(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Defining "historical times" will help you and me both here.

I already asked you what time frames your delusion was working within. Gonna answer that, any time soon?

Conventionally the dividing line between history and prehistory is the introduction of writing.

(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Perhaps you can tell us all about the two-four million years of pre-history from Lucy on forward and how you know that the Tower of Babel was not built at any time in history before there was an actual Babylonian empire.

Hey, guy - protip: none of that happened. An event occurring to settled, agricultural peoples is necessarily historical, but since, conveniently enough, you're already ignoring all historical evidence and consensus... what would the point be?

I already asked you what time frames your delusion was working within. Gonna answer that, any time soon?

(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You make it sound as if we go into ancient history we find tons of documents with dates on them, and scientists in agreement worldwide today about their dating of artifacts where dates are implied. That's what CIRCA is used for.

I merely reminded you that interlocking and entirely consistent dating mechanisms exist. We've covered this before. You never responded. But I can point out to you that explicit recordings of dates are among the least reliable sources.

In order to suppose some unrecorded sudden transformation, one must account for the utter lack of evidence. This applies to the Tower of Babel, to the Flood, and even to the Creation your fairy tales describe. There. Is. No. Evidence.

And yet you, and those of your mindset, clearly do accept the validity of historical record. You accept the validity of the last two thousand years of recorded history implicitly. You accept at absolute minimum at least several thousand years prior to that.

And, at some magical point, you simply decide to stop accepting the evidence. The data informing our knowledge of the past is a discretely sampled spectrum. It is continuous. It is self-consistent. It is self-reinforcing. And at an arbitrarily line you declare by deluded fiat that thus far and no further will you accept the conclusions reached by human reason and investigation into our common history.

What a way to live.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
15-11-2013, 02:46 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
(15-11-2013 12:02 PM)Raptor Jesus Wrote:  
(15-11-2013 11:45 AM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I've already stated that linguists believe language originated in the fertile crescent with a few outliers (PhD's, not languages).


So you're saying that Genesis is not a reliable document? By evidence, do you mean documentary evidence from the ancients? For language can only be recorded as documents or on coinage or steles, etc.


Defining "historical times" will help you and me both here. Perhaps you can tell us all about the two-four million years of pre-history from Lucy on forward and how you know that the Tower of Babel was not built at any time in history before there was an actual Babylonian empire.


You make it sound as if we go into ancient history we find tons of documents with dates on them, and scientists in agreement worldwide today about their dating of artifacts where dates are implied. That's what CIRCA is used for.

PleaseJesus...lets get back to the point and stop arguing about points no one even cares about, and don’t matter at all in any event.

Why is "God" so insecure about mankind building a small tower, when we've gone FAR beyond that, without "God" knocking over all our skyscrapers, planes, satellites, flicking people off the top of K2, destroying our observatories, knocking the International Space Station out of orbit, throwing the moonlanders back to earth destroying Voyager and Voyager 2 before they ever made it off ground? Why would "God" have been so insecure about this tiny tower, knocking it over, when we have far better than that now and he doesn’t' seem to care anymore?

And why was he so insecure back then in the first place when we are not even close to transverseing the enormity of all of "creation"? Why does any of this story make any sense for “God” to do? It doesn’t matter where language was “developed”, you’re not going to accept our points anyway, and I don’t care if you do or not because that’s not my question, and it has no effect on the purpose of my question whether language developed in that region or if it evolved across a broad spectrum for regions and peoples, and primates over hundreds of thousands, to millions of years, or if it all started in one spot, that’s not the fucking point, and the answer either way does not effect the point.

Why the fuck does “God” care? That is the question. Why did “he” care back then when what he destroyed paled in comparison to what we’ve achieved now. That’s the fucking question. Get on point!

One of the frustrations for me in discussing the Bible with you is your lack of Bible knowledge. That's for atheists in general here--even the ones with long Bible time "in" prior to deconversion, following which they tried to forget the little they'd absorbed. Your question is rather like asking why Adam and Eve were expelled or why there was a Flood in Noah's time. It's very basic information.

The reasoning behind the destruction of the tower is in the chapter--actually the nine short verses that make the entire recounting of the incident:

"Now the whole earth had one language and one speech. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. 3 Then they said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They had brick for stone, and they had asphalt for mortar. 4 And they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower whose top is in the heavens; let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.”

5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6 And the Lord said, “Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them. 7 Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.” 8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of all the earth, and they ceased building the city. 9 Therefore its name is called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth." -- from Genesis 11

How would you now answer your questions from reading the above passage? I'm curious. Not judging you, just curious. Thanks.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 02:55 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
Like the Creation Story and the Flood Story, this is another story taken from ANE culture and respun and rewritten for Christianity to convey a message to the people of the time. It is much like the parables that Jesus used as a teaching tool.

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 02:57 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
(15-11-2013 02:55 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Like the Creation Story and the Flood Story, this is another story taken from ANE culture and respun and rewritten for Christianity to convey a message to the people of the time. It is much like the parables that Jesus used as a teaching tool.

Eesh. You Christians of the wrong sort are no better than us atheists!

Tongue

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 03:05 PM (This post was last modified: 15-11-2013 03:11 PM by PleaseJesus.)
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
CJ:

Quote:[PJ had no] substantiation or references whatsoever… The languages of sub-saharan Africa are entirely indigenous. The languages eg New Guinea are entirely indigenous so far as it is possible to tell.
Thank you for the last bit with the correct disclaimer. PS. You put what YOU just wrote without substantiation or references. Or didn’t you notice!
I’m older and grew up with a linguistic clade or tree that originated in Iraq. Once people noticed how that dovetailed with the Bible (oh no! dash it all!) some revisionist scholars concluded that sub-Saharan Africa with its lack of contact with the outside world (world languages) must have been first or never evolved from the proto-language of the Tower of Babylon. How convenient. I say “some” of course.

Quote:[Genesis is not reliable as a document.]
What do I think? I think it is inconvenient for you to be truthful with your opinions and say “there’s a Babel story in Genesis but it’s specious” rather than “There is no documentary evidence for Babel and its tower”. That’s like saying there’s no reliable evidence for the historicity of Jesus when you’d be the first to notice similarities with three of the gospels denoting them as synoptic and originating from a Q source or a Markan priority.

What ticks me off (and should tick off many Christians) is how you still miss notice of the fact that even dating the gospels and etc. abysmally late, there still would have been a few grandfathers and great-grandfathers around who would say, “the gospels say gigantic crowds followed Jesus during several successive annual visits to Jerusalem, and healed and rose people from the dead? Jesus who? Jesus which?” but there were still many Christian converts among the Jews.

Please stop LYING or “misquoting” or whatever it is you’re doing when you say “There’s no documentary evidence for the Tower of Babel” because there is but you just demean and defame the text it appears in. Further, there’s the etymological evidence of the words Babel (babble) and Babylon.

Quote: I already asked you what time frames your delusion was working within. Gonna answer that, any time soon?

Conventionally the dividing line between history and prehistory is the introduction of writing.

Now that you’ve defined terms as I requested, I’ll answer… before there was writing. Just as there was no writing or cuneiform when Adam and Eve were around. The happenings were recounted to Moses.

Quote: I merely reminded you that interlocking and entirely consistent dating mechanisms exist. We've covered this before. You never responded. But I can point out to you that explicit recordings of dates are among the least reliable sources.

In order to suppose some unrecorded sudden transformation, one must account for the utter lack of evidence. This applies to the Tower of Babel, to the Flood, and even to the Creation your fairy tales describe. There. Is. No. Evidence.

And yet you, and those of your mindset, clearly do accept the validity of historical record. You accept the validity of the last two thousand years of recorded history implicitly. You accept at absolute minimum at least several thousand years prior to that.

And, at some magical point, you simply decide to stop accepting the evidence. The data informing our knowledge of the past is a discretely sampled spectrum. It is continuous. It is self-consistent. It is self-reinforcing. And at an arbitrarily line you declare by deluded fiat that thus far and no further will you accept the conclusions reached by human reason and investigation into our common history.

There is evidence for Babel, the Flood, and some would say via inductive logic, cosmology and etc. the recent creation. You’re astonishing me because it sounds like you feel deeply or intuitively that scholars if they received such evidence would follow it to its natural conclusions. You stand aloof consistently accusing fundamentalists of deliberately misconstruing or misinterpreting evidence, yet you refuse to believe any scientist could ever do so simply because there are three letters in their job titles. This despite the fact that since there are born again fundamentalist PhD’s in different disciplines you would say that even PhD’s can be misled or misleading—just not secularists.

For gosh sake, please, never, ever be a judge or juror. Your confirmatory bias is nothing short of astounding. There’s so much BS in philosophy, psychology and paleontology to name just three disciplines…

…I admit that Christians can be stupid yet saved and often I’m critical of other Christians on this forum. But your double standard is titanic in scope.

I'm further happy to discuss the several dating mechanisms that harmonize for ancient peoples and societies. But then we'll soon agree--you think proto-humans are several million years old yet ALL agronomy, writing, building, etc., etc. -- being people, in other words, is in no way any older than some thousands or as you'd say, tens of thousands of years.

Human population doubles (until recently) approximately every 120 years, leading us to conclude there were 8 people some 6,000 years ago during the Flood. The first time someone told me that, I broke out MS Excel and went to it.

But with humans in societal organization 100,000 years ago, we'd have--let's see--our current six billion with doubling periods of 120 years, so takeaway my fundie 6,000 years from a Noahic Flood, from the past 100,000 years (let alone two-four million years) yielding 94,000 years to double 783 times... what is six billion times 2 to the 783'rd power anyway?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 03:11 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
(15-11-2013 02:55 PM)kingschosen Wrote:  Like the Creation Story and the Flood Story, this is another story taken from ANE culture and respun and rewritten for Christianity to convey a message to the people of the time. It is much like the parables that Jesus used as a teaching tool.
Just like everything else in the bible, right?Big Grin Ain't no shame in a pure mythology. Mythology is a beautiful thing! This tale of babel seems to be a metaphor for man's ultimate hubris, trying to outmatch god or to be god's equal. Ultimately to fail and have everything crumble around them because mankind can not achieve pure perfection but we could strive to have a reasonable facsimile.
Also to this story is used to explain all the many languages and probably how we got the word "babble" which means to speak foolishly or to speak unintelligibly to a given listener.

"I don't have to have faith, I have experience." Joseph Campbell
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-11-2013, 03:47 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Thank you for the last bit with the correct disclaimer. PS. You put what YOU just wrote without substantiation or references. Or didn’t you notice!

You didn't provide any. About 5 minutes of research showed your claims to be incorrect, but not having been provided any references I didn't bother with any of my own.

Anyone reading along who's curious can do their own five minutes of research and see for themselves.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  I’m older and grew up with a linguistic clade or tree that originated in Iraq. Once people noticed how that dovetailed with the Bible (oh no! dash it all!) some revisionist scholars concluded that sub-Saharan Africa with its lack of contact with the outside world (world languages) must have been first or never evolved from the proto-language of the Tower of Babylon. How convenient. I say “some” of course.

I think I see your problem here. At what point did language ability evolve in modern humans? Was it a single event? Multiple events? These are open questions in evolutionary biology.

But what is not in question is that modern human beings evolved in Africa. You can deny that if you like, but at that point you're simply not engaging coherently with reality.

But here's the thing: even if all extant languages can be traced back to a singular common ancestral language, that doesn't prove the fairy tale, for important reasons.

One - we can only study attested languages. We know, today, of languages which definitely existed but about which we know nothing. We cannot possibly then include them in a common linguistic tree of descent. Therefore even if all other known languages did appear to arise from a common source (a hilariously generous 'if'), it does not and cannot follow that all languages thence arise. There are simply no grounds for doing so.

Related to this is the problem of finding any evidence itself. If you're evading the problem of no material evidence by asserting that this would have happened prior to such a time as there would be material evidence, then one cannot possibly ever establish the common reconstructed proto-language to have been the sole original language among human beings. The very conditions necessary for your farcical story not to be immediately falsified also forestall its ever being verifiable.

And finally - gradual linguistic drift is explicitly contrary to the parameters of the fable. So there's that.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  What do I think? I think it is inconvenient for you to be truthful with your opinions and say “there’s a Babel story in Genesis but it’s specious” rather than “There is no documentary evidence for Babel and its tower”.

Those statements are equivalent.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  That’s like saying there’s no reliable evidence for the historicity of Jesus when you’d be the first to notice similarities with three of the gospels denoting them as synoptic and originating from a Q source or a Markan priority.

I'm not sure if you're not aware or if you're just being the usual mix of obstinately dissonant, but historicity and divinity are not at all the same thing.

The Guatama Buddha existed. The Prophet Mohammed existed. Joseph Smith and Bahá'u'lláh absolutely existed. Your thoughts on them?

But let's stick to the matter at hand. Sidetracking misdirects are charming, but not particularly compelling.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  What ticks me off (and should tick off many Christians) is how you still miss notice of the fact that even dating the gospels and etc. abysmally late, there still would have been a few grandfathers and great-grandfathers around who would say, “the gospels say gigantic crowds followed Jesus during several successive annual visits to Jerusalem, and healed and rose people from the dead? Jesus who? Jesus which?” but there were still many Christian converts among the Jews.

Aaaaaand... the accuracy of the Gospels pertains to the accuracy of the early history recounted in the Old Testament, how, exactly?

But, uh, way to misdirect, I guess.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Please stop LYING or “misquoting” or whatever it is you’re doing when you say “There’s no documentary evidence for the Tower of Babel” because there is but you just demean and defame the text it appears in.

In which case, one might be forgiven for thinking you would then possess evidence.

Where is it?

"You can't criticise the Bible because Bible" is idiotically vapid, but, uh, you do whatever floats your ark, champ.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Further, there’s the etymological evidence of the words Babel (babble) and Babylon.

Oh sweet zombie Jesus. Did you just try to equate the etymology of the word 'babble' with the word 'Babylon'?
(pertinent quote from the OED: "No direct connexion with Babel can be traced; though association with that may have affected the senses")

That sound you just heard was every etymologist on Earth collectively facepalming.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  Now that you’ve defined terms as I requested, I’ll answer… before there was writing. Just as there was no writing or cuneiform when Adam and Eve were around. The happenings were recounted to Moses.

Yeah. That wasn't the question. Wrong delusional belief.

The Tower of Babel. When was it? This is a very simple question. Answer it.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  There is evidence for Babel, the Flood, and some would say via inductive logic, cosmology and etc. the recent creation.

Okay.

Like what?

(you... you do realize you're impugning the majority of scholarship in just about every field imaginable by that preposterous assertion, yes?)

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You’re astonishing me because it sounds like you feel deeply or intuitively that scholars if they received such evidence would follow it to its natural conclusions.

Ah, so you do realize!

Why wouldn't they? Do they not want truth? Is that not the point of investigation?

I certainly would like to know the truth.

I shouldn't have to tell you this, but "lol conspiracy" isn't an answer.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  You stand aloof consistently accusing fundamentalists of deliberately misconstruing or misinterpreting evidence

I've noticed you doing exactly that when it came to quote mining and misinterpreting scientific articles about tracing humanity's most recent common genetic ancestors; that's simply the first example to come to mind.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  ... yet you refuse to believe any scientist could ever do so simply because there are three letters in their job titles. This despite the fact that since there are born again fundamentalist PhD’s in different disciplines you would say that even PhD’s can be misled or misleading—just not secularists.

Fuck me.

"lol conspiracy" isn't an answer.

And that is precisely what you're advocating. That the overwhelmingly dominant consensus in countless fields of human endeavour is knowingly and self-reinforcingly ignoring and/or suppressing whatever phantasmal purported "evidence" you think exists.

Of course people can be wrong. But you don't seem to realize how being wrong works. You are now accusing the entire scientific establishment of having a vested interest in being knowingly wrong. That is absurd.

And, of course, notwithstanding that the scientific method of inquiry is the only means we have of attempting to learn more of the world around us. So there's that.

After all, you, yourself, are fantastically dependent in every aspect of your life on innumerable scientific advances. Have you forgotten?

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  For gosh sake, please, never, ever be a judge or juror. Your confirmatory bias is nothing short of astounding.

Sorry, can you project harder? I think there are a couple people watching who didn't quite catch it.

Funny; I'd've thought most people would want their jury to be composed of educated, impartial peers who are actually capable of rational thought. You learn something every day.

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  There’s so much BS in philosophy, psychology and paleontology to name just three disciplines…

"lol conspiracy" isn't an answer.

Can you bring up any substantive examples?

(15-11-2013 03:05 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  …I admit that Christians can be stupid yet saved and often I’m critical of other Christians on this forum. But your double standard is titanic in scope.

"lol conspiracy" isn't an answer.

...

So far you have:
a) refused to answer my direct questions about what you actually believe.
b) brought up irrelevant examples of other stories.
c) insulted the integrity of the vast majority of scientists living and dead who have ever worked in the last several centuries.

How compelling.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
15-11-2013, 05:21 PM
RE: Tower of Babel (not really that impressive)
(15-11-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  One of the frustrations for me in discussing the Bible with you is your lack of Bible knowledge...
Number 1) Fuck you, you know nothing about my bible knowledge, or how extensively I've studied it. So again, I repeat...fuck you.

(15-11-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  …Your question is rather like asking why Adam and Eve were expelled or why there was a Flood in Noah's time. It's very basic information.
It's because "God's" a dick right? I bet its because "God's" a dick...that or more likely he doesn't exist, and none of those things ever actually happened right? Yeah, I think it's that last one.

(15-11-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  The reasoning behind the destruction of the tower is in the chapter--actually the nine short verses that make the entire recounting of the incident:

Alright…I am actually going to try to get you to ACTUALLY answer the question. But, as you say “The reason behind the destruction of the tower is in the chapter, I will begin by condensing the verse down to that part which you claim answers my question, so you can’t hide behind the size of the verse and simply say, it’s in there. Let’s look at what is actually says, that pertains to anything you would give as a reason for God’s actions, based on the verse itself.
"…the Lord said, “Indeed the people are one and they all have one language, and this is what they begin to do; now nothing that they propose to do will be withheld from them. 7 Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”…
(15-11-2013 02:46 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  How would you now answer your questions from reading the above passage? I'm curious. Not judging you, just curious. Thanks.

Kingschosen's answer would have been a perfectly acceptable one.
Quote:Like the Creation Story and the Flood Story, this is another story taken from ANE culture and respun and rewritten for Christianity to convey a message to the people of the time. It is much like the parables that Jesus used as a teaching tool.
Had you said the same, then I would have said they same about your answer. However you did not.

But to answer your question, we will split the response into two categories.

a) Reality.
In which these things never happened, and there for I refer back to Kingaskler answer as the correct answer, as we happen to live in reality.

b) This really happened (which it clearly didn’t).
Had this really happened (which it didn’t) then, to answer my own question, which is still what I am asking you to get around to doing, I would say, clearly “God” doesn’t like that mankind is becoming so powerful as to be able to build a tower, dwarfed by modern day technology (not going to list it all again, it was in my previous post) yet, this very comparitively insignificant technology advancement of building a comparitively shitty brick tower, was enough to concern “God” that man could do anything, and that shitty little brick tower was a scary enough technological advancement that it threatened to rival his power, which he cannot stand for. So in a hissy fit he broke man’s toy, took his ball, and went home, saying “now no one gets to play”.

Now, you are free to chose category a), in which case I will say, “I agree, it didn’t really happen, there for there is no need to explain, other than it as mythology.
But you are choosing category b) that it really happened…so back to my effing question,
Quote:Why the fuck does “God” care? That is the question. Why did “he” care back then when what he destroyed paled in comparison to what we’ve achieved now. That’s the fucking question.



Just incase you missed the question again...I'm going to point it out with arrows, so that you answer the actual question I'm asking, rather than continue to focus on questions I'm not asking. Here is the question---->>>Why did “he” care back then when what he destroyed paled in comparison to what we’ve achieved now<<<----
^^^^^^^^^^

And, why is he so threatened by the power of mankind, and fears it so much if "he" is the all powerful being that "he" supposedly is. We see this behavor from "God" right from the start as seen in genisis in which the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.” and aparently the serpent was not lying because "God" then says says, “The man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.” 23 So the Lord God banished him from the Garden of Eden to work the ground from which he had been taken. 24 After he drove the man out, he placed on the east side[e] of the Garden of Eden cherubim and a flaming sword flashing back and forth to guard the way to the tree of life.
Guarded it with an angel with a fucking FLAMING SWORD?!?! Are you kidding me? How scared of our power and might is "God", and how insecure is he really?


But if your explaination is that "God" is just petty and a dick, and knocks over towers and doesn't allow people to talk to each other because he's a pussy afraid of ants, then that's an okay answer, I guess. Doesn't make sense, but at least explains his behavor in the bible. But if you contend that he is also the all powerful, all knowleageable, all wise being that you seem to contend him to be, then non of these actions make sense, because what in the hell would he have to fear from us?

However, if you contention is not that he is all powerfull, and all those all other things, that that's fine. Just say that that is not what you believe of "God" then I'll at least understand your point of view of this random being being scared of people, or fucking with them just to be a dick, because that would at least be more in line with a less that perfect, powerful being. But if you say he is all perfect and powerful, than explain why whe would do these actions, other than him being a dick?

...
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: