The Tower of "Babel"

[VirginShallConceive]

Thanks WIP!

totopic

Is the story of the "Tower of Babel" literal, metaphorical, allegorical or an etiology?

I guess it's possible that the "Tower of Babel" story was conjured up by a man, and even though he didn't necessarily believe it himself, he meant for his listeners to take it literally. And, since there are people today who still take the story literally, you can safely assume that at least some, if not all, of his original listeners took it literally as well. Your question is a good one because the story is ultimately taken as all four of the ways that you listed, depending on who you ask.

 

[mdougie]

I guess it's possible that the "Tower of Babel" story was conjured up by a man, and even though he didn't necessarily believe it himself, he meant for his listeners to take it literally. And, since there are people today who still take the story literally, you can safely assume that at least some, if not all, of his original listeners took it literally as well. Your question is a good one because the story is ultimately taken as all four of the ways that you listed, depending on who you ask.

I have never seen any reason to believe the story was ever meant as anything but figurative.

 

[Vanguard]

I always find it interesting to look at biblical history accounts (not the word of God...different things) from various historical and cultural views. Many people forget that the Bible was written by people living in what we now know as Northern Africa, Southern Europe, Western Asia and that whole Mediterranean - Arabian Sea area. That was the world "as they knew it." There are no biblical accounts of interaction with East Asians, Native Americans (by that I mean North, Central and South), Native Australians, Pacific Islanders, etc. who also have different historical acounts dating back 1,000s of years BC.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

I have never seen any reason to believe the story was ever meant as anything but figurative.

I totally believe you when you say this. But, do you accept the fact that people do take it literally?

 

[mdougie]

I totally believe you when you say this. But, do you accept the fact that people do take it literally?

Sure.

 

[enlightened]

I have never seen any reason to believe the story was ever meant as anything but figurative.

\What is wrong with it being literal?

 

[VirginShallConceive]

Sure.

Okay. Can you realistically give it at least a 1% chance that the author meant for the story to be taken literally?

NASB: GENESIS 11:1-9

1 Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words.

2 It came about as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there.

3 They said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly.†And they used brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar.

4 They said, “Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth.â€

5 The Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built.

6 The Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them.

7 Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another’s speech.â€

8 So the Lord scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city.

9 Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the Lord scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth.

Well, in my opinion, verse 1 and verse 9 make it reek of literalism.

 

[mdougie]

Okay. Can you realistically give it at least a 1% chance that the author meant for the story to be taken literally?




Well, in my opinion, verse 1 and verse 9 make it reek of literalism.

I will give it a 1% chance, but to me it doesn't seem even close to literal. It is like telling a kid that thunder is God bowling and rain is God crying. Sure it could be literal, but really?

 

[Vanguard]

Well, in my opinion, verse 1 and verse 9 make it reek of literalism.

I can accept that if you can accept that their view of the "whole earth" was limited to the Roman Empire area back then.

Edit: let me clarify...I know that the OT came before the Roman Empire. I am referring to the total area that the Romans conquered during the height of their glory days. That area overlaps "the whole world" as they knew it back then.

 

[VirginShallConceive]

I can accept that if you can accept that their view of the "whole earth" was limited to the Roman Empire area back then.

Edit: let me clarify...I know that the OT came before the Roman Empire. I am referring to the total area that the Romans conquered during the height of their glory days. That area overlaps "the whole world" as they knew it back then.

Yes, I can accept that the author's grasp of the concept "whole earth" was certainly far from accurate. I highly doubt that the author even knew about the area that would eventually be called "Britannia".

 

[VirginShallConceive]

I can accept that if you can accept that their view of the "whole earth" was limited to the Roman Empire area back then.

Edit: let me clarify...I know that the OT came before the Roman Empire. I am referring to the total area that the Romans conquered during the height of their glory days. That area overlaps "the whole world" as they knew it back then.

I think I also need to clarify something. My post(#27) was directed solely to mdougie. I copied and pasted your quoting of the passages that made up the story so I could make access to them convenient for mdougie. I left your username on there because I had to give you credit for going through the trouble of being the first to post them in this thread. Sorry if I caused any confusion. I answered your interesting reply anyway.

 

[WIP]

Reminder:
From the ToS
2.1: This is a Christian site, therefore, any attempt to put down Christianity and the basic tenets of our Faith will be considered a hostile act. Please read: Statement of Faith

From the SoF
The bible is the inspired, infallible and authoritative Word of God.
and
We believe that the Bible is inspired by God in its entirety, and is without error in the original autographs, a complete and final written revelation from God.

 

[Aloysium]

Is the story of the "Tower of Babel" literal, metaphorical, allegorical or an etiology?

i choose all of the above: while it may be used as a folksy way of explaining why the world is the way it is (different cultures/languages), it relates to a historic event that describes a truth of man's relationship with God

i see it present today, when we lose ourselves in formulating systems of ideas/beliefs rather than developing a true relationship with what they point to: God, we are left with a confusion of misunderstandings, breakdowns in communications, words that mean different things to different ppl, etc

 

[Vanguard]

i choose all of the above: while it may be used as a folksy way of explaining why the world is the way it is (different cultures/languages), it relates to a historic event that describes a truth of man's relationship with God

i see it present today, when we lose ourselves in formulating systems of ideas/beliefs rather than developing a true relationship with what they point to: God, we are left with a confusion of misunderstandings, breakdowns in communications, words that mean different things to different ppl, etc

While I can definitely appreciate and understand where you're coming from, not everything in the Bible is about building a relationship with or listening to God. Some of the accounts are attempts to explain certain aspects of the world in which they lived back then. Their lack of scientific knowledge often led them to supernatural beliefs. With today's technology and scientific understanding, we can refute some early claims that border on the supernatural. Please do not confuse this as me saying "there is no God," as that is NOT what I am saying. One must separate spiritual accounts from historical/scientific accounts in the Bible and look at them independently, on a case by case basis.

 

[P31Woman]

While I can definitely appreciate and understand where you're coming from, not everything in the Bible is about building a relationship with or listening to God. Some of the accounts are attempts to explain certain aspects of the world in which they lived back then. Their lack of scientific knowledge often led them to supernatural beliefs. With today's technology and scientific understanding, we can refute some early claims that border on the supernatural. Please do not confuse this as me saying "there is no God," as that is NOT what I am saying. One must separate spiritual accounts from historical/scientific accounts in the Bible and look at them independently, on a case by case basis.

Why would you trust a spiritural account if the God of scripture is too weak to have a book compiled that is accurate from a historical and scientific point of view?

 

[P31Woman]

I read all sorts of books. Science, religion, the bible, fiction. When I read the bible it doesn't strike me that I am supposed to take it as anything but anything but a book of spiritual growth and guidance. It doesn't seem to be a book about scientific facts. It is parable, analogy, metaphor. It doesn't seem literal. While parts actually happened, other parts to me at least obviously did not. Certain books at least. Genesis being one that isn't literal. The other being Revelation. They are meant to convey moral stories. Teach us how to think and act. They aren't actual history, science and literal.

Matthew Maury would not agree with you. He is the father of modern oceanography. He discovered the "paths of the sea" because when he read the bible it discussed those paths. He beleived scripture and charted those paths.

Do you know during the time of the OT is filled with medical laws we obey today! Thousands have died over the centuries because they did not follow the sanitation laws of scripture that we consider to be common sense today. During the middle ages that "common" sense was not so common and millions dies. Simple sanitation, health and quarteen commands in scripture are there for all to read.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

I think the tower of Babel is very literal.

It has hidden messages just as a parable would have.

But the tower itself is literal.

 

[Vanguard]

Why would you trust a spiritural account if the God of scripture is too weak to have a book compiled that is accurate from a historical and scientific point of view?

Please clarify your question. I want to make sure I am addressing your question correctly. I am not 100% sure I follow what exactly you're asking.

 

[P31Woman]

Please clarify your question. I want to make sure I am addressing your question correctly. I am not 100% sure I follow what exactly you're asking.

Why would you put any stock in a book written by men and not God?

 

[Vanguard]

Why would you put any stock in a book written by men and not God?

You do realize the Bible was written by men? God did not sit down with ink and quill and pen anything in the Bible. The authors claimed to be anointed and divinely inspired, but I have given reasons for those in another thread. Every single word written in the Bible was done so by human hands.

Having said that, Christians don't read the same OT of the Bible that Orthodox Jews [Hebrews] do. I try to bridge that gap by looking at various English translations, and then the actual Hebrew and Greek [NT] versions. From there it goes into textual criticism, hermeneutics, transliteration, and a whole pot full of linguistic processes.

Furthermore, the Bible was written in a time and culture far different than what is present today. If you think of things in today's terms, you have lost context. Most Christians don't go as deep into apologetics and theology as I do, but given that I am working toward my PhD in Theology, it is to be expected.