I was listening to a recent speech that Matt Dillahunty gave in Australia (listen here if you’re interested), and in part of it he brought up the story of the Tower of Babel, found in Genesis 11. It’s a story I’ve thought about several times since leaving Christianity. I don’t recall everything Matt said about it, though I know I’ll be making some of the same points he did. I haven’t been a Christian for about 5 years now, and it’s sometimes hard to imagine that I ever believed stories like this one, though I definitely did. And a number of other conservative Christians do as well.
A few days ago, I asked my wife if she remembered what God was angry about in this story, and she gave the same reason that I thought: God was angry because people were being prideful. In case you’ve forgotten, the crux of the story is that several generations after the flood, mankind was growing numerous, and they all had one common language. They decided to build a tower that would reach Heaven (see how prideful?), so God put a stop to it by confusing their language. This caused the various groups to split up, each person going along with whomever could understand him or her.
However, after looking at the details a bit more, it turns out that my recollection was a bit off. First, the people weren’t actually being prideful at all. Instead of trying to build a tower to Heaven — God’s abode — they were just trying to build a tall one to make it easier to stay in one geographic area:
Now the whole earth had one language and the same words. 2 And as people migrated from the east, they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. 3 And they said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.” And they had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar. 4 Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let us make a name for ourselves, lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth.”
— Genesis 11:1-4
The phrase “in the heavens” is just talking about the sky, not the realm of God. For just a moment though, let’s pretend that they really had been trying to reach God with their tower. Why would that be such a bad thing? Doesn’t the Bible repeatedly tell us to seek after God? Furthermore, would they have succeeded? On September 12, 2013, Voyager 1 actually left our solar system. In all those miles, it didn’t bump into Heaven. No earth-based tower would ever run the risk of reaching God’s home. So not only were the people not attempting that, even if they had been it wouldn’t have succeeded, and it actually would have been flattering toward God.
So if God wasn’t angry at them for being prideful, why did he confuse their language and force them apart? The next few verses give us the answer:
And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. 6 And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language, and this is only the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. 7 Come, let us go down and there confuse their language, so that they may not understand one another’s speech.” 8 So the Lord dispersed them from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. 9 Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the language of all the earth. And from there the Lord dispersed them over the face of all the earth.
— Genesis 11:5-9
Essentially, God was just being a jerk. He was like a kid stirring up an anthill. I mean, God forbid (literally) that people advance technologically, right? Wouldn’t want them discovering things like the germ theory of disease, after all. And why prevent wars by keeping people within the same culture? Much better, I guess, to create different cultures so mistrust and bigotry can form. Furthermore, if this was such a problem at the time, why hasn’t he stopped us again? We’ve figured out ways to overcome language and culture barriers now. We’ve done so much more than just “build a tall tower.” God’s motivation in this story simply makes no sense at all.
However, if you step back for a moment and stop trying to view this as literal history with an actual god, things become clearer. Imagine living thousands of years ago and trying to make sense of the world around you. You think the world is flat and that the sun revolves around it. You don’t understand the cause of thunder storms, earthquakes, or volcanoes. You can’t imagine how animals and humans got here without some kind of creator. And if there’s a creator, why didn’t he make life easier? Why does he allow disease and starvation? There are so many difficult questions that just have no answer. And so people began to formulate answers as best they could. It’s easy to see that one of those questions may have been “why didn’t God (the gods) give us all the same language?” And so they came up with an answer.
Looking at it from that perspective, it’s much easier to understand how a story like this came to be. These people were dealing with the world as they saw it — and to them, the only reason they could think of for God not wanting everyone to have the same language, is that they would accomplish too much. They had no idea that humanity would one day find a way around that problem, rendering their explanation invalid.
Speaking as someone who grew up believing that stories like this were actual history, I know how easy it is to just go along under that assumption without question, especially if those around us believe as we do. It’s not stupidity; it’s either isolation and ignorance, or it’s stubbornness. We can help the isolated and ignorant by just being available to discuss these things when they come up. And with the Bible, there are plenty of examples to be found.
Finding Truth 
“Most creationists place Noah’s flood around 2348 BCE” – Two of the Judaic sources I use place the imaginary flood at 2600 BCE, as opposed to the actual, historical Mesopotamian flood that occurred in 2900 BCE and covered the equivalent of 3 counties near the city-state of Shurrupak, in what is now modern Iraq.
LikeLike
Thanks Howie (and William). And you’re right — I did not mean electronics and whatnot; I really just meant creative ability, architectural ability, ingenuity, etc. So technology in the sense of advancement, not in modern cybernetics, electronics, etc. If that’s what Mike thought I meant, then fine. I can see where he would be confused.
LikeLiked by 2 people
“Plus, I feel like he’s actually illustrating how weak a conservative Christian view of this story is. So hopefully it will be useful to someone at some point.”
The church waits with open arms any of your converts (although I don’t know of any. Last time you declared your goal and tried to convert Kathy it was a failure) that try and make the claim from your non existent reference to technologies that God is against the advancement of technologies. it wont be useful to anyone but those wanting to buy the yarn
“Also, does anyone else see this as referring to a concern over man’s technological prowess?”
Feel free to ask your faithful but you were asked to show it in the text not in the opinion of rubber stampers. When are you even going to move your buried honesty to deal with the text?
IN regard to deleting comments be my guest . How you end up spending your free time is up to you. i have no qualms about that at all.
LikeLike
“I agree, Gary. You just can’t reason with unreasonable people.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Why do we give these drive by trolls any time at all?” – I tried last time to suggest that everyone ignore Mike and Kathy, but that didn’t work out so well.
LikeLike
Yes, I lied (though not for long) to try to save my family ties. And yes, a few readers of this blog felt that I had not been treated well, though that’s not how I see things at all. And many of those readers were actually Christians, not “rubber-stampers.”
But no Mike, the real issue is not that you’re just being brutally honest and “telling like it is.” You’re just a jerk. Are you alone in that? No. There are atheist jerks too — sometimes they comment on this blog. I often ask them to be more cordial. But if you’re trying to race to the lowest common denominator, then congratulations — you made it. If you were honestly concerned with trying to lead people to “salvation,” then you would follow the advice of guys like James, who said:
But instead, you prefer to align yourself with the dogmatic pieces of crap that are driving people away from churches in droves for their lack of love and humility. You’d be a much more pleasant person if you could squeeze a little humanity in there next to your warped Christianity.
LikeLike
“Thanks Howie (and William). And you’re right — I did not mean electronics and whatnot; I really just meant creative ability, architectural ability, ingenuity, etc. So technology in the sense of advancement, not in modern cybernetics, electronics, etc. If that’s what Mike thought I meant, then fine. I can see where he would be confused.”
I am not confused Nate, frankly I don;t see how technological advancement would only apply to electronics . I don’ t know how Howie makes that exclusive view of technological advancement. It kind of odd ball to me
” I did not mean electronics and whatnot; I really just meant creative ability, architectural ability, ingenuity,”
if you meant just creative ability then your point gets even weaker. The temple artisans are said to be inspired by God to be creative and Daniel and other Hebrew teens (I believe – youths ) are said under the hand of god to excel at all their studies at Babylon. Ive mentioned Daniel before in pointing out your total lack of any Biblical context to claim God was ever anti technology.
I can only think you were inspired to write that nonsense (or figured it would fit in well) because of Athiest claims in our culture that Christians are antiscience
LikeLike
Wouldn’t Mikey make a crackerjack poster boy for Christianity? Christian wannabes could learn to be just like him – and the Pew people projected that Christianity in the US would dwindle – not with Mikey around as a shining example!
LikeLike
“And I really don’t even know what “breach of contract” he’s talking about.” – Well, I do recall that for a time, you were advising us not to mention his name for some reason.
LikeLike
Mike, you are correct that the words “technological advances” is not in the scripture. By the same token, the scripture dealing with the tower does not include the words “idol or pagan worship.”
I’m only guessing, but I would imagine Nate was postulating that “this is only the beginning of what they will do” and “nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them” leads to what has taken place since then … which includes “technological advances.”
It’s interesting that you would focus on this while ignoring many other issues that have been brought up in the discussions.
LikeLike
“You mean I might have to add new email and IP addresses to the blacklist whenever you decide to irritate us?” – You don’t suppose he plans to slip under your radar by pretending to be a sweet, polite, turn-the-other-cheek Christian, do you? I’d pay to see how long that lasts!
LikeLike
“Yes, I lied (though not for long) to try to save my family ties. And yes, a few readers of this blog felt that I had not been treated well, though that’s not how I see things at all. And many of those readers were actually Christians, not “rubber-stampers.”
they backed you up on it Nate that was my point and people who stand for principle would not of after that mess. If you truly are repentant (but I do get a little hint there you think it was a bit justified to save famiy ties to concoct that rather extreme scenario of standing before a church and lying to the whole group) then you’d know what I mean.Good friends do not back up such actions.
Beyond that I am not interested in your rhetoric about me. Answer the question regarding your proof text or continue lying that its in there – your choice. I consider people who make arrangements not to have discussions about people on their blog but don;t live up to them as jerks as well. That you violated a gentleman’s agreement not to discuss or mention me on your blog but think you can lecture me on civility or good manners just shows how arrogant you have become. I abided by your decision to ban me under that agreement . I lived up to my part. You didn’t. You say you don’t even remember it but did you ever ask.. well mike what did we do or sorry if we did break an agreement. Nope….no the new an improved rubber stamped enabled and inflated Nate doesn’t give a rip.
SO we are even we both think each other are jerks. Now get on with it. wheres the text in your proof text ?
”
But instead, you prefer to align yourself with the dogmatic pieces of crap that are driving people away from churches in droves for their lack of love and humility.”
Your blog and your mission for it is to attempt to drive people or confirm their straying away from what the church teaches and you are going to lecture me as if you have a drop of concern about the church of Christ.”
Now thats some SERIOUS hypocrisy. Take a bow Nate.
I am concerned with many souls not just yours. As you try and do the kinds of things you did with this passage for others to be led astray frankly in terms of priority – the other souls come first by a mile
As to quoting passages to me I am sure you are aware the amount of passage. I could quote about alleged Christians who try and block or lead away people from the truth. You would consider them extremely insulting and I haven;t posted any of them in part because i really do;t know if they fully apply to you yet but i do know you are close
Meanwhile you have your various characters like the Grllll (whatever) with a FO character sliming with vile and putrid at Christians who come here and for all your talk what i see …you were good with it for months upon months (maybe even still although haven;t seen him of recent)
As I have said before..spare me your fake outrage at incivility. You only have it for those who disagree with you. When your faithful are on blast against Christians they have your full support
Pure hypocrisy
LikeLike
“It’s interesting that you would focus on this while ignoring many other issues that have been brought up in the discussions.”
Nan I have no doubt whatsoever that you wish I would come off on Nate’s straight up lying on the text (and you are pretty much lying too if you can read through this thread and see me only talking about “this” one issue) . But no matter how you or he cries – It aint happening. He and you have only one other option.
LikeLike
“It’s interesting that you would focus on this while ignoring many other issues that have been brought up in the discussions.” – It’s called obfuscation —
LikeLiked by 1 person
Wow, that was almost a Crown-style rant!
LikeLike
Wait a minute. Another hoodwink. How could Nate just take some credit that he only lied for a short time when it was his wife that brought that to an end???
oh and Arch. I think you made mistake and liked one of my posts. seeing it disturbed me that I might have written something you agreed with and therefore had fallen low enough to meet your level of nonsense
LikeLike
“Further, KC, in Mesopotamia, where the Tower of Babel fable is alleged to have taken place”
Thanks Arch, I enjoyed the read.
LikeLike
“Also, does anyone else see this as referring to a concern over man’s technological prowess?”
Nate, I just looked up the Tower story in the ETZ HAYIM, Torah and Commentary. Here is it’s commentary on the 11th Chapter of Genesis.
“The story of the Tower of Babel seems inspired by the Babylonian Temple towers (ziggurats) . Can we sense here the Torah’s ambivalence about large cities, with the anonymity, crime, and lack of neighborliness they represent ? Or its suspicion that TECHNOLOGY, the celebration of human ingenuity, will often lead to idolatry, people worshipping the work of their own hands ?
Looks like you were on to something , Nate ! 🙂
LikeLiked by 3 people
” Further, KC, in Mesopotamia, where the Tower of Babel fable is alleged to have taken place – assuming that “pagan” is defined as any religion other than Judaism – there would have been no religion other than that which is considered pagan. ”
LOL what nonsense. CIrcular nonsense at that. You assume all religions are created so you come to a conclusion of a religion being created. No historian can tell you how far back a concept of God stretches back. Concepts and prayers leave no archaeological finds if you could not figure it out. Archaeology can only give us clues as to when temples were built and religious ritual utensils or tools were used. Religions that were based on sculpted idols would of course show up pretty easy and earlier in the archaeological records before monotheistic religions that believed God was not physical. Monotheistic religions such as as the one judaism grew into (but was not created by) would show up later and most concretely with temples
The kind of worship we see characters such as Seth and Cain and even Abraham practicing have no such physical items but are Judaic in form. They are based on prayer and impromptu sacrifices without official temples. Nothing much to leave behind including even scriptures. Any source that claims they can indicate when certain religions that have no archaeological evidence to leave behind were originally initiated is blowing smoke.
But Let me guess. This is just like your claims based on Finkelsteins assertions. which oops are not holding up too well nowadays. I have offered my condolences before but boy you sure were rambling on him. You swore by his assertion regarding the monarchy of David as “scholarship” that the old stupid Christians just could not handle truth(again um…..ooooops!) and could never provide actual source material data anyway yourself.
Well ho hum you always have Nate’s favorite Wikipedia scholarship to fall back on. Theres always that. Who needs actual source data in your kind of “scholarship” anyway eh?
“Judaism – more accurately described as “Yahwehism” – didn’t exist as such until the Jews united for a time with the Midianites in the southern Levant, when the god of the pre-Yahweh”
Another unsubstantiated claim or copy and paste. The roots of Judaism goes all the way back to the garden and again it can’t be contradicted because not all religions leave physical artifacts
As usual the only thing you really ever do in posts like this is quote articles and either leave out the source of the claims or use ones that don’t even pretend to have actual source data material at all. Bring some beeef one day. and yes if you try and harp on “scholarship”
I will continue to ask you how your blunder of believing FInkelstein on the monarchy of David held up for you. I guess you can always retreat again into – all the finds recently just a part of a conspiracy theory for tourism.
LikeLike
Hey Arch, you ever notice how a Chiwawa will come up and bark at you then when you think he’s going to leave he starts barking at you again, and again, and again ? You get my drift ?
LikeLike
” Or its suspicion that TECHNOLOGY, the celebration of human ingenuity, will often lead to idolatry, people worshipping the work of their own hands ?
Looks like you were on to one something”
Poor, poor soul trying soo hard to snatch a victory from the jaws of defeat 😉 but to no avail
Even your copy and paste of a commentary (not the biblical text as nate claims) thats asking a question (not stating a fact as Nate claims is in the text ) indicates the concern would OF COURSE be IDOLATRY not technology just to stop people from advancing.
lol…..So even your own source contradicts Nates claim that God just wanted to make sure they didn’t advance in technology and actually back s my claim that it would be about idolatry (which Nate point blank stated had absolutely nothing to do with the text)
Thanks KK. You da man
Hey KK Maybe since you are studying this so hard you can actually point me to where it says anything about knowledge in the text. Wheres it at? Nate won’t answer because he can’t but maybe you can.
LikeLike
“Chiwawa will come up and bark at you then when you think he’s going to leave he starts barking at you again, and again, and again ? You get my drift ?”
I do . Apparently Chihuahua’s are good sense of character and know to bark at the bad seeds. they seldom bark like that at me
LikeLike
At least you’re maintaining your never-wavering intention of demonstrating the depth of your ignorance, Mike. Both history and archaeology indicate that the Sumerians settled in Mesopotamia and maintained a theocracy there for over 4000 years before the Akkadians gradually took over the valley with their own pantheon of gods, ultimately absorbing the Sumerian pantheon into their own, often merging the Sumerian gods with their own as well. Their greatest leader, Sargon, opened a secure passage from Mesopotamia all the way to the Mediterranean, then down the Levant nearly to Egypt.
Ultimately the Akkadians were over run by the Amurrites, who followed their on god, Amurru, known also as “El Shaddai,” the same god who in Exodus explains in 6:3 that that’s how Abraham, Isaac and Jacob knew him, but that his real name was YHWH – it’s only coincidental, surely, that at the time of the announcement, the Hebrews had just joined temporarily with the Midianites, symbolized by the wedding of the fictitious Moses with Zepporah, a Midianite woman and daughter of Jethro, a priest of the YHWH cult.
“The kind of worship we see characters such as Seth and Cain and even Abraham practicing have no such physical items but are Judaic in form. – All fictional characters, about whom nothing was written until 950 BCE, at a time when Judaism was well established – so of course their stories involved Judaic customs.
“The roots of Judaism goes all the way back to the garden” – Your garden is mythological and never existed.
You must have little to do, that you have time to comment all day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Even your copy and paste of a commentary (not the biblical text as nate claims) thats asking a question (not stating a fact as Nate claims is in the text )”
Mikey, would you mind sharing where Nate claims this ? I really don’t recall seeing it.
I have always been under the impression that Nate was stating his opinion. Where did he change his opinion to be a fact ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Mikey’s not going anywhere for a while – he’s having too much fun demonstrating the virtues of Christianity.
LikeLike