Michael R. Ash: Is the Tower of Babel historical or mythological?

[Sevenbak]

I don't think anyone here is denying the existence of towers.

Well, let's look closely at the title page, just to make sure what is being denied here.

Remember, these are Moroni's own words.

"An abridgment taken from the Book of Ether also, which is a record of the people of Jared, who were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people, when they were building a tower to get to heaven

[semlogo]

What I like about the Ether version of the Tower of Babel is that no claim was made that everyone on earth spoke the same language previous to it.

[Sevenbak]

Question: do you believe the world is flat and covered by a crystal dome on which the stars hang?

Where is that reference, exactly?

[semlogo]

Well, let's look closely at the title page, just to make sure what is being denied here.

Remember, these are Moroni's own words.

"An abridgment taken from the Book of Ether also, which is a record of the people of Jared, who were scattered at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people, when they were building a tower to get to heaven

[Sevenbak]

What I like about the Ether version of the Tower of Babel is that no claim was made that everyone on earth spoke the same language previous to it.

It backs up the language of Genesis.

Gen. 11: 9 (6-9)

9 Therefore 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.

Omni 1: 22.

22 It also spake a few words concerning his fathers. And his first parents came out from the tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people; and the severity of the Lord fell upon them according to his judgments, which are just; and their bones lay scattered in the land northward.

Mosiah 28: 17.

17 Now after Mosiah had finished translating these records, behold, it gave an account of the people who were destroyed, from the time that they were destroyed back to the building of the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people and they were scattered abroad upon the face of all the earth, yea, and even from that time back until the creation of Adam.

[Sevenbak]

You'll notice that the claims of the Ether version are quite different (more modest) from the claims of the OT version.

You're misrepresenting Moroni and doing violence to his words to suit your own purposes however. Interpreting scripture differently than you do is not the same as condemning the things of God - unless you're claiming to be God.

How am I doing 'violence' to Moroni's words? If you want to speak of violence, it's Ether's description of the wrath the Lord swore he would pour out upon Babel.

Ether 1: 33 Which Jared came forth with his brother and their families, with some others and their families, from the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people, and swore in his wrath that they should be scattered upon all the face of the earth; and according to the word of the Lord the people were scattered.

[semlogo]

Where is that reference, exactly?

About the firmament:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament

The word is derived from the Hebrew raqa, meaning "to spread out" by stamping, stretching, beating, or making broad,, e.g. the process of making a metal bowl by hammering metal flat, or "to make a spreading (of clouds)".[1] Thus, in the Bible, Elihu asks Job "Can you beat out [raqa] the vault of the skies, as he does, hard as a mirror of cast metal (Job 37:18)?"

The word is mentioned in the King James Bible, in the course of the Genesis creation narrative (Genesis 1:6

[semlogo]

It backs up the language of Genesis.

Gen. 11: 9 (6-9)

9 Therefore 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.

Omni 1: 22.

22 It also spake a few words concerning his fathers. And his first parents came out from the tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people; and the severity of the Lord fell upon them according to his judgments, which are just; and their bones lay scattered in the land northward.

Mosiah 28: 17.

17 Now after Mosiah had finished translating these records, behold, it gave an account of the people who were destroyed, from the time that they were destroyed back to the building of the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people and they were scattered abroad upon the face of all the earth, yea, and even from that time back until the creation of Adam.

No, it doesn't. Ether's claims are much more modest. Compare to the Genesis version:

Genesis 11:1-9

The Tower of Babel

1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech.

2 As men moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.

3 They said to each other, "Come, let's make bricks and bake them thoroughly." They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar.

4 Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth."

5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the men were building.

6 The LORD said, "If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.

7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."

8 So the LORD scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city.

9 That is why it was called Babel

[David T]

That's an good understanding, except when you take into consideration Moroni's own words on the matter:

Ether 1:2

And I take mine account from the twenty and four plates which were found by the people of Limhi, which is called the Book of Ether.

And you just quoted from the Book of Mormon. Did you have the original language plates in front of you?

[semlogo]

How am I doing 'violence' to Moroni's words? If you want to speak of violence, it's Ether's description of the wrath the Lord swore he would pour out upon Babel.

Ether 1: 33 Which Jared came forth with his brother and their families, with some others and their families, from the great tower, at the time the Lord confounded the language of the people, and swore in his wrath that they should be scattered upon all the face of the earth; and according to the word of the Lord the people were scattered.

As I already explained, it's because you're twisting his words to mean that everyone should essentially believe in your understanding of scripture, or be thrust down to hell.

Notice that Ether makes no claims that the Lord confounded the language of all people.

[volgadon]

About the firmament:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firmament

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/febible.htm

Flat earth:

Isaiah 11:12

12 And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the FOUR CORNERS OF THE EARTH.

Job 38:13

13 That it might take hold of the ENDS OF THE EARTH, that the wicked might be shaken out of it? (KJV)

Not to mention:

"He set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved. (Psalm 104:5)

I do believe Maklelan demolished this favourite argument of yours.

[semlogo]

I do believe Maklelan demolished this favourite argument of yours.

Who?

[volgadon]

Who?

You can refresh your memory here, beginning with post #65.

[semlogo]

You can refresh your memory here, beginning with post #65.

Oh yes, I remember. He was quibbling about differing beliefs among individual Hebrew groups and nailed his argument to that point, which was rather irrelevant, given the actual text in the Bible stating plainly that the firmament is a solid dome.

[David T]

You can refresh your memory here, beginning with post #65.

With respect, I think Mak's answers express the same general point semlogo is trying to in this thread. What Mak was correcting was the details that sem was clinging onto cocnerning the makeup/materials/form of the Firmament in Israelite belief. In my opinion, Mak clearly won the argument. But that argument isn't the same point being made in this thread.

As Mak said in those threads, "As for the crystal dome, its composition is not addressed in the Bible, and the idea that it was crystalline is only one interpretation (and a late one). Another interpretation holds that it was opaque, and the stars are actually holes in the firmament. According to this ideology, the gods lived on the firmament.", as well as, in response to : "I think he is complaining that it is not scientifically accurate according to our present understanding of "science"": He said, "Of course not. These texts far predate the development of any scientific method of observation. What difference does it make that they are not scientific treatises? "

Mak is clearly not advocating a literal reading of the Genesis 1 and 2 narratives, and recognizes that they contain cosmological ideas that are foreign to modern science - such that many in those different cultures certainly believed or at least commonly expressed that (and was a part of biblical literature) there was some literal physical object in the sky which was the 'firmament'. The makeup or shape of such an object is trivial in the context of this discussion. The concept that there is such an object expressed in Biblical literature, however, is. Mak even says, "The cosmological firmament is a physical object in the Israelite worldview. That has been my position since the very beginning."

[semlogo]

As Mak said in those threads, "As for the crystal dome, its composition is not addressed in the Bible, and the idea that it was crystalline is only one interpretation (and a late one). Another interpretation holds that it was opaque, and the stars are actually holes in the firmament. According to this ideology, the gods lived on the firmament."

Different materials ARE alluded to, but crystal is mentioned in the Bible.

Ezekiel 1:22

And the likeness of the firmament upon the heads of the living creature [was] as the colour of the terrible crystal, stretched forth over their heads above.

Job 37:18

can you join him in spreading out the skies, hard as a mirror of cast bronze?

As you say though, the material wasn't important to his point - but it wasn't important to mine either. The point is, there is no firmament as described in the Bible (using ANY of the descriptions). Ergo, you can't treat the OT as literal history or a scientific text.

[volgadon]

With respect, I think Mak's answers express the same general point semlogo is trying to in this thread. What Mak was correcting was the details that sem was clinging onto cocnerning the makeup/materials/form of the Firmament in Israelite belief. In my opinion, Mak clearly won the argument. But that argument isn't the same point being made in this thread.

Perhaps I should have been clearer. I was talking about the form of the argument, the wiki stuff, etc.

Mak is clearly not advocating a literal reading of the Genesis 1 and 2 narratives, and recognizes that they contain cosmological ideas that are foreign to modern science

Neither am I. Again, it is the form of the argument that was demolished. I was surprised to see it surface again. I agree though with many of the other points semlogo is making in this current thread.

[semlogo]

Perhaps I should have been clearer. I was talking about the form of the argument, the wiki stuff, etc.

Neither am I. Again, it is the form of the argument that was demolished. I was surprised to see it surface again. I agree though with many of the other points semlogo is making in this current thread.

Is my point really altered if the composition of the firmament is crystal or bronze or anything else? It's clearly a solid dome, regardless. Correct me if I'm wrong, but space shuttle has yet to collide with such a dome.

[volgadon]

Ergo, you can't treat the OT as literal history or a scientific text.

You can't treat all of the OT as literall history, but I agree unreservedly with your comment on scientific texts.

Different materials ARE alluded to, but crystal is mentioned in the Bible.

Yet in Ezekiel the word is qerah usually has the meaning of "ice" or "frost", so an alternate understanding of the substance alluded to is entirely possible.

[David T]

At risk of sounding like a board nanny, let's please move along. The arguing amongst those who essentially agree serves only to weaken the credibility of and distract from their real shared point

[volgadon]

Ok

[semlogo]

You can't treat all of the OT as literall history, but I agree unreservedly with your comment on scientific texts.

Yet in Ezekiel the word is qerah usually has the meaning of "ice" or "frost", so an alternate understanding of the substance alluded to is entirely possible.

Ezekial was describing the appearance. Ice looks similar to crystals. I don't think it's an important distinction to make.

[semlogo]

At risk of sounding like a board nanny, let's please move along. The arguing amongst those who essentially agree serves only to weaken the credibility of and distract from their real shared point

Agreed

[MAsh]

How long before Mike Ash or one of his intellectual offspring writes an article in Mormon Times about the Book of Mormon being mythological?

It won't be me. If the BoM people were real ancient people they would have had myths. Histories, espeically ancient-histories, can be be based on actual people and events and still contain mythological elements and legends. They are not mutually exclusive. As I state in my MT article, I believe in actual Nephites/Lamanites/Jaredites.

[HiJolly]

This is the key reason why the concept of Biblical inerrancy is such a problem. If people believe that one aspect is incorrect, their worldview is shattered, and then they overcompensate by throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

The Bible is not a single work, by a single author, with a single genre, with a single meaning. Joseph claimed the Song of Solomon wasn't inspired. Prophets have said Eve coming from the rib was figurative. Brigham Young called the creation from the dust a baby story. Does these things break the complete Bible?

The whole revelatory experience we each go through, throughout our lives, should be a major clue to the truth of what nackhadlow is saying. While it's true that there is a broad variety of such experiences, and it sometimes varies from person to person and ALSO from experience to experience, we should understand that writing it down, not to mention redacting it from 1,000's of years previous, should inherently produce misunderstandings and problems with the setting and background and such. Thus the caution that errors are the errors of men, and the default acknowledgment that there ARE ERRORS, regardless.

I agree that the Bible is a beautiful collection of the doctrines and the ways of Godliness, but I also accept that specific details can be totally out of context as we read them today, if we are not careful. And many times we have no way to know *how* to be careful.

Caesar decided to tax "all the world"? REALLY?

HiJolly