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 
Hi everyone,
Just wanted to briefly say that I appreciate all the comments. Sorry I was so out of pocket last week — we took the family to Disney World and had a great time! 🙂 So I’m just now starting to actually read all the comments. I’ll probably chime in again once I’m caught up.
Thanks!
LikeLike
” I just don’t see how absolute nothingness could ever produce anything (to be fair I don’t think Lawrence Krauss holds this view – his version of “nothing” still has “something”). ”
Only Krauss will not admit it. Instead he plays semantic games with the word nothing which is why its fair game for him to be called out on it as even some atheists have done. Thats not the only problem with the idea. It also a totally unscientific proposition. We have ZERO experimental evidence that QM works outside of spacetime which universally is accepted as something. So to invoke an explanation for the creation of spacetime that is only verifiable with an existent spacetime is balderdash. Finally like many of the new atheist Krauss is oblivious to religious beliefs. Both Judaism and Christianity claims that God creates by law. the existence of quantum laws before any physical reality would be a point for Religious belief not a point against it.
“If nothing creates nothing and something exists, then I think it’s safe to conclude that something has always existed.”
It also safe to say that that something does not operate by natural processes since all natural processes have a cause and that something has none. its a nail in the coffin to believing that reality is ultimately based in materialism. Its not a therefore God conclusion but it is a therefore not materialism for anyone who really gets down to thinking about it.
LikeLike
“Language and nationality still divide the planet today and at every turn of history. it rather effectively divides many people even in the same country” – Ablacksmanagain
Very true. It’s just that god also seems to later punish and criticize people for being divisive and having a “my nationality is superior to yours” mentality. It just seems to me that an omnipotent god would have to make a lot of effort at being this short sighted. It is one of the things that makes me question the claims of these men who told this story.
“and who said they didn’t understand your skepticism.” – Ablacksmanagain
Who said I didn’t think they didn’t understand my skepticism? True, there are some who do not, but rational people do. But those who say things like, “Nothing special or remarkably hard to believe,” seem to have difficulty seeing who such a story requires a lot of trust in supernatural claims to believe.
“You think that understanding should some how equate to validation. Many of you like to insert yourself into a debate as if anyone really cares what your position is. In a debate its about the issues not whether you are skeptical or in Arch’s case what he will or will not accept.” – Ablacksmanagain
Doesn’t this work both ways? And I don’t like debates, I much prefer discussions, but I suppose at times the distinction is slight if not moot.
“Languages DID diverge. Only a dolt in linguistics can’t see that in even present day languages. You only have your back up at the concept because a text mentioned God had something to do with it.” – Ablacksmanagain
Sure there are different languages. And sure people are divided by those languages and nationalities. I can see that. as you said, a dolt can see that. in some ways this obvious difference in languages may make some curious people ask why that is… and then it’s not hard or remarkable to see how ancient people created a story for their children, and that it was told enough times that people started believing it.
And the mention of god? Well that is one reason I have a hard time with this. Do you buy every story that says god had something to with it? but also for the reasons that had been presented, like people still make tall towers (much taller today so this event didn’t stop that), nations are still prideful (so this event didn’t change that), people naturally multiple and that multiplication mandates that people move out for more space and resources (so this event didn’t really force that anymore than nature would have). The one thing this story does seem to do, is to give a possible explanation for how and why there are different languages – kind of like a lot on ancient legends, no?
LikeLike
“The word “God” has you all jumping about at absurdities but you can’t address the absurdities of materialism explaining ultimate reality.” – Ablacksmanagain
when i was a believer, the only reason i believed this story was because it was in the bible. I suspect that’s the same for you. reading this out of any other book , and you’d scoff it away as absurd – because it is.
And i dont have to address the absurdities with materialism or anything else when i’m discussing a story in the bible, as they have nothing to do with each other.
There are much more than 2 possibilities. I am not even sure how you’re using “materialism” nor am i sure what that has to do with the tower of babel. The tower of babel has enough of its own absurdities to contend with.
the bible being absurd doesnt prove “materialism” nor does “materialism” being absurd prove the bible.
that’s my take.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“”Very true. It’s just that god also seems to later punish and criticize people for being divisive and having a “my nationality is superior to yours” mentality.
Where pray tell? you just clean made that up to get to your shortsighted claim. In the history of scripture there is not a nation that suffers judgment merely on the basis of their feeling superior. Feeling superior AND taking action against israel yes. One gentile nation feeling superior to another by itself….nada
which is why that argument has nada going for it
” and then it’s not hard or remarkable to see how ancient people created a story for their children, and that it was told enough times that people started believing it.”
the intellectual problem is that you can say that about anything, Give it 500 years and the narrative for some with 9/11 will be that planes crashing into skyscrapers was a story created by people who hated muslims to justify their hatred. They can then say just like you “its not hard or remarkable to see how they created that story for their children”
Lets face it you determine what is legend and what is real by your supernatural bias chiefly. However like I said you are not capable of defending your materialistic anti supernatural premise when it comes to something so basic as ultimate reality. All of you generally duck and run when that subject comes up but it is key to determining rationally whether a bias against the supernatural has merit or not.
“And the mention of god? Well that is one reason I have a hard time with this. Do you buy every story that says god had something to with it? but also for the reasons that had been presented, like people still make tall tower…”
this is your and Nates blunder from not reading the text. the passage is crystal clear that the action was not taken merely on the basis of eliminating pride or for stopping building tall buildings. It says so plainly
“5 But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people 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.”
So it was to thwart and slow down future plans beyond building tall buildings
how you two and others can miss that the action was to prevent future plans and not merely plans to build tall buildings is testament to this blogs and its participants’ nature of making up strawmen in their heads to claim they knocked down what the Bible never states.
Have difference in language created different cultures that have kept people from being united? Yes. then mission accomplished.
LikeLike
“Women coming from Seth and Cain is so ordinary a starting point when you put everything coming out of nothing don’t you think? (I know ..rhetorical…you don’t).” – Ablacksmanagain
this is confusing me. are you saying that both of these on are on the same level of credibility? I dont know krauss or what he says, but are you saying his position has just as much merit as women being created out of Seth and Cain and vise versa?
LikeLiked by 1 person
“when i was a believer, the only reason i believed this story was because it was in the bible. I suspect that’s the same for you. reading this out of any other book , and you’d scoff it away as absurd – because it is. ”
You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t get the sense in anything you have ever written that you have the supernatural powers of mind reading. Quite the contrary you usually make a fool of yourself when you presume to tell me why I believe what I believe. I did not come from a christian family and did no accept stories because they were in the Bible because i had no great allegiance to the Bible before becoming a believer. So stop projecting your own paper thin christian experience to my life and spare us the intellectual dishonesty of telling me what i think and why.
“And i don’t have to address the absurdities with materialism or anything else when i’m discussing a story in the bible, as they have nothing to do with each other.”
Like I said you can always run away as you have before but until Nate decides he wishes to change the way he moderates this board (which he will have to do to squelch my voice this time – actions have consequences) you will be called out on the inconsistent underpinnings of what you consider absurd and that IS your bias against the supernatural that can only exist because you dodge the issue.
“the bible being absurd doesnt prove “materialism” nor does “materialism” being absurd prove the bible.”
Sorry you make no sense whatsoever. Your definition of absurd is based on the plausibility of there only being the material and not the supernatural. You can dodge and dance all you wish. Absurd is a relative word to your presuppositions so in any debate/discussion with me i will raise the subject and you can either finally answer or babble on why you don’t need to. It won;t change my bringing it up.
that’s my take.
LikeLike
“this is confusing me. are you saying that both of these on are on the same level of credibility? I dont know krauss or what he says, but are you saying his position has just as much merit as women being created out of Seth and Cain and vise versa?
Good night! You bring back memories of the futility of your reasoning and why after a while I ignored your posts.
Whats there to be confused about? Whats more difficult?
To start with a human male body and a create a female “clone” (not exactly but for the lack of another word) or to have nothing at all and create everything from it?
I wait with bated breath your contorted answer.
TO spell it out – Krauss has less merit by several orders of magnitude
LikeLike
“you just clean made that up to get to your shortsighted claim. In the history of scripture there is not a nation that suffers judgment merely on the basis of their feeling superior.” – Ablacksmanagain
I don’t know, I think the story of Jonah is a good example. I think Jesus with the Samaritan woman was another. And of course, paul says that there is neither jew nor greek, as if he’s trying to persuade them to not look at nationality or to be divided by such differences. Obadiah is a good example. In one verse he says rails against edom for the violence they did, but then says that it was their gloating at israel’s misfortune that made them as guilty as those who did it.
But also, what leads people to commit violence or deeds against another? Does not the feelings of distain and the like?
“the intellectual problem is that you can say that about anything, Give it 500 years and the narrative for some with 9/11 will be that planes crashing into skyscrapers was a story created by people who hated muslims to justify their hatred. They can then say just like you “its not hard or remarkable to see how they created that story for their children” – Ablacksman
well these aren’t really the same are they? Even if they don’t have airplanes 500 years in the future, they’ll have airplane wreckage and old airplanes and airplane parts laying around. They’ll likely still have some written accounts of it, of an even that requires nothing miraculous… and they’d have more than one source to help confirm it. But true, they may still find it incredible and may be very skeptical – which is another reason to find this tower of babel story skeptical, as it takes the belief in a supernatural claim, from only one source and no other evidences…. If it’s so easy for people to find a naturally plausible even incredible, then they are much more likely to have a hard time buying one like the tower of babel. Yeah, old fable like stories that come without proof or evidence, from superstitious men who lived in superstitious times, just isn’t the best way to win the confidence of others – and it’s not just me.
“Lets face it you determine what is legend and what is real by your supernatural bias chiefly. However like I said you are not capable of defending your materialistic anti supernatural premise when it comes to something so basic as ultimate reality. All of you generally duck and run when that subject comes up but it is key to determining rationally whether a bias against the supernatural has merit or not.” – Ablacksman
LOL, I realy don’t know what you’re talking about. I really don’t mind discussing it, but I’d have to read up on “your materialist anti supernatural premise” in order to discuss it with you. I’m still not sure what it even has to do with the bible or babel.
“this is your and Nates blunder from not reading the text. the passage is crystal clear that the action was not taken merely on the basis of eliminating pride or for stopping building tall buildings. It says so plainly” – Ablacksmanagain
I’ve given you the reasons why I don’t think the “Pride” issue made sense (although I agree it’s what the passage is talking about) and why I don’t think it made any change. I think it gave them one more thing to be prideful over if anything else. But then I also addressed other points that I have other believers (not as educated as yourself) believe regarding this story. You’re just not the only one I’m writing to.
“So it was to thwart and slow down future plans beyond building tall buildings” – Ablacksmanagain
And what did that accomplish?
“Have difference in language created different cultures that have kept people from being united? Yes. then mission accomplished.” – Ablacksmanagain
Because god hates unity?
LikeLike
“So it was to thwart and slow down future plans beyond building tall buildings” – We’ve since been to the moon, how well did that work out for the Big Fig? “The best laid plans of mice and gods –“
LikeLike
JESUS FAILED TO FULFILL ANY OF THE SIX AUTHENTIC JEWISH MESSIANIC CRITERIA
INTRODUCTION: The word “messiah”[1] means anointed with oil. All kings,[2] high priests,[3] and prophets [4] in the Jewish Bible are described as “messiahs” because they were all anointed with oil into God’s service. Many Jewish prophets foretold that a particular messiah, the Messiah ben David, would appear and fulfill six major prophecies that will lead the world into a special Messianic Era. These messianic criteria are and have always been universally accepted by the Jewish People. Jesus did not qualify as the Jewish Messiah ben David for the simple reason that he did not fulfill any of these criteria. The Messiah ben David must:
1. have the correct genealogy by being
descended from King David and
King Solomon,
2. be anointed King of Israel,
3. return the Jewish People to Israel,
4. rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem,
5. bring peace to the world and end all war,
6. bring knowledge of God to the world.
THE BIBLE’S MESSIANIC CRITERIA ARE EMPIRICALLY VERIFIABLE: “Faith” is irrelevant to the Jewish concept of the Messiah ben David, because an individual either fulfills these prophetic criteria or he doesn’t. Christianity requires faith that Jesus is their “messiah” precisely because he didn’t fulfill any of the Jewish messianic criteria. Christianity’s concept of faith in Jesus is therefore a substitute for this defect. It is important to note that the fulfillment of each of the six Jewish messianic criteria is empirically verifiable and therefore no faith is required to determine the identity of the Jewish Messiah ben David. For example, the entire world will be able to observe that the Temple has been rebuilt, the Jews have returned to Israel, the entire world believes in God, and the world is at peace. Virtually none of the Christian messianic “proofs” are empirically verifiable.
LikeLike
If the cyclic universe or multiverse theories are being considered then they are said to be eternal. Since they are eternal (without beginning) they do not have a cause, similar to the eternal conscious mind theory. In all of these theories we have an infinite chain of events (mindless processes or conscious thoughts) which may seem impossible, but could still be true. I have yet to see a good argument for dismissing the idea of infinity existing within reality.
LikeLike
Gary, you know of course that listing of attributes for the anticipated Jewish messiah is exactly what Christians say the so-called “anti-christ” is supposed to present when he arrives to deceive the world.
LikeLike
THE FIRST MESSIANIC CRITERIA IS GENEALOGY: Of the six primary Jewish messianic criteria, the only one that the Christian Bible claimed for Jesus was genealogy. The Messiah ben David must be Jewish, from the Tribe of Judah, from the seed of King David, and from the seed of King Solomon. (See genealogy chart).
1.He must be Jewish.[7] One is Jewish if their mother is Jewish.[8]
2.He must be from the tribe of Judah.[9] Under Jewish law, tribal affiliation is through the birth father only.[10] Since Jesus allegedly had no human father, he had no tribal affiliation. Therefore, Jesus was not from the tribe of Judah and is eliminated from messianic consideration.
The book of Chronicles in the Jewish Bible lists the genealogy of Abraham through King David plus an additional 29 descendants. The Gospels of Matthew and Luke provide conflicting genealogies for Jesus in an unsuccessful attempt to demonstrate that Jesus fulfilled the messianic criteria of genealogy. These three genealogies are listed, compared, and contrasted on the following page.
JESUS DID NOT QUALIFY: NOTES TO THE GENEALOGIES OF MATTHEW AND LUKE [11] Matthew and Luke made numerous mistakes in their so-called “genealogies” of Jesus that eliminate him from messianic consideration. The numbers to the left of the text below refer back to the numbers on the genealogy chart on the preceding page:
(1) He must be from the House of David.
[12] Matthew 1 and Luke 3 traced Jesus’ lineage through Joseph back to King David. However, the Gospels assert that the “holy spirit” was Jesus’ father (not Joseph).[13] There is no indication in the Gospels that Joseph ever adopted Jesus although under Jewish law certain family and tribal affiliations must be through the birth father and cannot be claimed by adoption.[14] For example, if a Jewish priest, (a Cohen), has a male child, he has the status of a priest by birthright. However, if he adopts a child whose birth father was not a Cohen, the child does not have the status of a priest like his adopted father. Since Joseph was not Jesus’ birth father, there is no evidence in the Gospels that Jesus was from the house of David, which cannot be conferred through adoption under Jewish law. This eliminates Jesus from messianic consideration.
(2) He must be from the Seed of Solomon[15] According to prophecy, the Messiah ben David must descend through David’s son Solomon. Not only was Solomon a king, he built the first Temple, which has profound messianic implications. Matthew claimed that Jesus descended through Solomon but Luke claimed that Jesus descended through Nathan, David’s other son (who was not a king). This eliminates Jesus’ genealogy through Luke.
(3) A Fifteen Generation Difference: Luke’s genealogy from David to Jesus is fifteen generations longer than Matthew’s genealogy from David to Jesus. This undermines the Christian claim that the Gospels are the “word of God,” because God certainly knows the genealogy of King David. Some Christians attempt to solve this fatal problem by claiming that Luke’s genealogy is actually that of Mary, although Mary is not mentioned in Luke’s genealogy. Further, this claim is rendered meaningless by the fact that Jewish law only recognizes tribal affiliation through the father.[16] Even if one could consider the genealogy of the mother, if one assumes a generation is at least twenty years, this means that Joseph was at least three hundred years older than his wife (fifteen extra generations times twenty years per generation equals a three hundred year difference in their ages). This gives new meaning to the idea of a “May-December” relationship.
(4) Who was Jesus’ Grandfather? The two “genealogies” do not agree on the identity of Jesus’ grandfather. According to Matthew, Jesus’ grandfather was Jacob and according to Luke he was Heli. This creates another devastating contradiction, further undermining the credibility of the genealogies given for Jesus by Matthew and Luke.
PAUL AND THE GENEALOGIES: The apostle Paul was the putative author of the Epistles Titus and Timothy, which subtly address the issue of Jesus’ genealogy:
•”But avoid foolish disputes, genealogies, contentions, and strivings about the law; for they are unprofitable and useless.”(Titus 3:3)
•”…nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which cause disputes rather than Godly edification which is in faith.” (1 Timothy 1:4)
•
CONCLUSION: The flawed and contradictory genealogies in Luke and Matthew are extremely problematic since genealogy is the only authentic messianic criteria that the Christian Bible claims that Jesus fulfilled. Jesus is eliminated from messianic consideration because of the myriad of errors and problems in both Matthew and Luke’s genealogies.
LikeLike
I” don’t know, I think the story of Jonah is a good example. I think Jesus with the Samaritan woman was another. And of course, paul says that there is neither jew nor greek, as if he’s trying to persuade them to not look at nationality or to be divided by such differences. Obadiah is a good example. In one verse he says rails against edom for the violence they did, but then says that it was their gloating at israel’s misfortune that made them as guilty as those who did it.”
You haven’t read much of anything you just wrote. Jonah is a book about sparing a gentile nation because they repented of their many sins not merely because they thought highly of themselves over other nations,Paul is talking about those that have been made one in Christ by believing in him not nations in general and edom was chastised by God for wanting to take over Israel land.
to put it blunt. You are totally clueless as to every single one of those passages. Please do some reading and come back when you are ready.
“well these aren’t really the same are they? Even if they don’t have airplanes 500 years in the future, they’ll have airplane wreckage and old airplanes and airplane parts laying around”
Every generation has believed that their civilization would not fade away. You step ahead a few thousand years like the story of Babel now is and you very well could have nothing but written accounts and video and given that the technology will be way ahead video could be as doctored and created out of pixels as easy as writing accounts was for the time of Babel
“I’ve given you the reasons why I don’t think the “Pride” issue made sense (although I agree it’s what the passage is talking about) and why I don’t think it made any change”
sigh we don’t agree. Please go and do some reading and you will see I do not just point at pride. High places were used primarily for pagan worship. You cannot leave that out of the context. Would God be displeased that they were building high places to worship other Gods? yes and it makes total sense that he would not be pleased with it.
I’m sorry but you really haven’t changed. You don’t know what you are talking about, don’t understand the issues and don’t even read what it is that you claim I am agreeing with you on. too much of a waste of time for me…sorry will start ignoring your posts again.
LikeLike
Nan,
Evangelicals and fundamentalists will not be around to worry about the Anti-Christ. Remember, they have been raptured by that time.
LikeLike
True enough, Gary. I just find it “interesting” that Christians can screw around and manipulate scripture to create their own stories (similar to what the bible writers did).
LikeLike
“. Jesus did not qualify as the Jewish Messiah ben David for the simple reason that he did not fulfill any of these criteria. The Messiah ben David must:
1. have the correct genealogy by being
descended from King David and
King Solomon,
2. be anointed King of Israel,
3. return the Jewish People to Israel,
4. rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem,
5. bring peace to the world and end all war,
6. bring knowledge of God to the world.”
Lol….IF i were you i would have left out messiah ben Joseph too because it completely destroys your concept that more than one advent of messiah was invented by Christians. If its your first time hearing the term Messiah ben Joseph…..google awaits.
What every antimissionary Jew leaves out of the qualifications is the most repeated and clear one
That the gentiles would receive and trust him (Isiaih 11)
and they have absolutely no coherent explanation whatsoever for how eternal righteousness was brought (something only the messiah can do) in before the fall of Jerusalem in AD 70 as required by daniel 9. Sorry but Jesus totally fulfills the requirement of messiah to bring in eternal righteousness end the sacrifice etc before AD70 and he is trusted and accepted by the gentiles. Isiah 11 is explicit that when the messiah does gather the Jews to Israel it will also be with gentiles who already have put their trust in him . In order to do that he obviously must be known to him before he is anointed and rebuilds the temple
Please go do some studying beyond talking points and make this a real debate. Right now you are just reading points and have no grasp of the material
P.s. if not for christianity the world would seldom know of the torah so your number 6 has been totally fullfilled by Yeshua.
LikeLike
The discrepancies in the genealogies of Jesus are interesting. I had never realized the issue of there being a fifteen generation difference between the two accounts. As the author above says, if you assign 20 years to a generation, that would mean that Joseph was at least 300 years older than Mary! That gives new meaning to the term, “robbing the cradle”!
Can you imagine the reaction of the keeper of the inn in Bethlehem when a 300 year old geezer shows up with a young virgin. No wonder he didn’t give them a room!
LikeLike
Early on, Peter linked to this article, which gives a much fuller treatment of the story than I did. I highly recommend it, especially in light of some of Mike’s comments.
Mike, I’m not quite clear on how you view this story. Are you saying that the people were being punished for pride, even though that’s not stated in the account? The passage itself says that God dispersed them to prevent them from accomplishing great things. Seeing as they were still at the “tower-building” level, what great things do you suppose God was worried about that haven’t been done since? Were they going to skip straight to faster-than-light travel, or something?
And as a side note, is there a particular chronology you hold to for things like the Flood? Because historical and archaeological evidence already provide other problems for the typical Bible chronology of the Flood and tower of Babel. We know that other cultures (and languages) existed long before the Flood is typically claimed to have happened, which means they would have existed before the tower of Babel too…
LikeLike
Yeah Gary, the genealogies are very problematic. Almost more confusing than the discrepancies are the couple of names that Matthew and Luke have in common. Very hard to get your head around how that could be possible…
And one of the things that always got me was Matthew’s attempt at fitting the genealogy into these divisions of 14, 14, and 14, but he has to eliminate some names to make them fit. By far the most likely explanation is that Matthew and Luke were working off two different sources for the genealogy. They were never intended to fit together.
LikeLike
THE SIXTH MESSIANIC CRITERIA IS THAT HE WILL BRING KNOWLEDGE OF GOD TO THE WORLD. Jesus did not bring knowledge of the Jewish God to the world. The Christian Bible directly contradicts the Jewish definition of God and directly contradicts all fundamental Jewish teachings about God. Most of the world still does not know God. Ironically, whenever a Christian missionary proselytizes a non-believer he proves that the Messiah ben David has not yet come. His act of proselytizing is a graphic demonstration that the world is not yet filled with knowledge of God.
ISAIAH: “They will neither injure nor destroy in all of My sacred mountain; for the earth will be as filled with knowledge of Hashem as water covering the sea bed.” (Isaiah 11:9)
ISAIAH: “The glory of Hashem will be revealed, and all flesh together will see that the mouth of Hashem has spoken.” (Isaiah 40:5)
ZEPHANIAH: “For then I will change the nations [to speak] a pure language, so that they all will proclaim the Name of Hashem, to worship Him with a united resolve.” (Zephaniah 3:9)
JEREMIAH: “They will no longer teach – each man his fellow, each man his brother-saying, “Know Hashem! For all of them will know Me, from their smallest to their greatest – the word of Hashem – when I will forgive their iniquity and will no longer recall their sin.” (Jeremiah 31:33)
CONCLUSION: Jesus failed to bring knowledge of God to the world and is therefore eliminated from messianic consideration. The Messiah ben David by definition is the man who fulfills the six authentic messianic criteria discussed above. The Christian idea of “belief or faith” in this messiah or in his identity is never mentioned in the Jewish Bible because it is irrelevant. In Jewish terms, failure to fulfill even one of the messianic criteria is conclusive proof that individual is not the Messiah ben David. Therefore, when Jesus died without fulfilling any of the six messianic criteria, this was conclusive proof that he was not the Messiah ben David.
THERE IS NO “SECOND COMING” CONCEPT IN THE JEWISH BIBLE: Missionaries respond with their “second coming” theory, which asserts that Jesus will accomplish everything when he comes “next time.” There are two major problems with this Christian answer. First, the second coming theory has no scriptural basis in the Jewish Bible. In fact, scripture states that when a person dies, “on that day his plans all perish.”[30] Therefore, according to scripture, when Jesus died, his plans ended. Second, the second coming theory can apply to any person who has ever lived and therefore is totally meaningless. For example, one can claim that their Gentile grandmother was the messiah. When challenged that she didn’t accomplish anything, one can say that when she “comes back” she will be born a Jewish man with the correct genealogy and will accomplish everything!
Gary: That is a great point. If Christians can pull the “Jesus is coming back to fulfill all the prophecies” card to make up for Jesus’ failure to fulfill even one of the six cardinal messianic prophecies, then I (or anyone else on the planet) can say that when I die I will come back to fulfill all the prophecies, and there is no way, my Christian friends, that you can prove I will not. Any excuse you give such as, “Well, you aren’t descended from King David” can be explained away with “poofing”: God will “poof” me the Davidic DNA! And, voila! I am the descendant of the King of David and therefore a candidate for the Jewish messiah!
I dare you to prove me and my magic “poofing” card wrong!
LikeLike
“[12] Matthew 1 and Luke 3 traced Jesus’ lineage through Joseph back to King David. However, the Gospels assert that the “holy spirit” was Jesus’ father (not Joseph).[13] There is no indication in the Gospels that Joseph ever adopted Jesus although under Jewish law certain family and tribal affiliations must be through the birth father and cannot be claimed by adoption.[14] For example, if a Jewish priest, (a Cohen), has a male child, he has the status of a priest by birthright. However, if he adopts a child whose birth father was not a Cohen, the child does not have the status of a priest like his adopted father. Since Joseph was not Jesus’ birth father, there is no evidence in the Gospels that Jesus was from the house of David, which cannot be conferred through adoption under Jewish law. This eliminates Jesus from messianic consideration.”
Yawn….The NT does not claim that Yeshua is a priest after the order of Cohen but after the order of Melchisdek so the Cohen has no application, Citing Cohen as application to king’s line shows you don’t know what you are talking about beside parroting what you have heard. Further the messianic prophecies make no claim that Messiah must be anything but the descendant of David. Mary qualifies as royal line. Again David himself was not anointed through being a king’s son which no matter how you ignore and refuse to engage the point destroys your premise that a king must be descended from another king. David’s father was Jesse.
Please go crack a Bible open. Saul was the king before David and was not his father therefore any rule that claims an anointed king must be the son of an anointed king is not a biblical rule since the Bible very clearly indicates David had no such father.
about 90% of your argument just went splash down the drain
” Some Christians attempt to solve this fatal problem by claiming that Luke’s genealogy is actually that of Mary, although Mary is not mentioned in Luke’s genealogy.’
There have been numerous explanations but nothing can be concluded for certain either way. Unfortunately the practice of naming children after other people in the family even generations later makes it almost impossible to tell.
You see this all through middle eastern history and it can get quite confusing but was the convention of the time even outside of the bible. People reused names like water and sometimes even with kings it got confusing because you could have say a King name harry son of John for example destroying a city and a king being defeated by men of the same city in another narrative who was Harry son of John. two different people one name.
At any rate there is no fatal problem. You merely want it to be. Yeshua being descended from Mary is enough because there is no rule in the bible that a king must be descended from another king directly. If so David himself who messiah was to be descended from could not be a king either.
that continues to be the undeniable fatal flaw in your argument.
LikeLike
“You’ll have to excuse me if I don’t get the sense in anything you have ever written that you have the supernatural powers of mind reading. Quite the contrary you usually make a fool of yourself when you presume to tell me why I believe what I believe. I did not come from a christian family and did no accept stories because they were in the Bible because i had no great allegiance to the Bible before becoming a believer. So stop projecting your own paper thin christian experience to my life and spare us the intellectual dishonesty of telling me what i think and why.” – ABlacksman
but, Mike, I didn’t say I knew that is what you thought. I was merely sharing what I suspected was the case. A lot of people, not just myself, form ideas about other people based on experiences with them.
do not fret, i am aware that such suspicions are not always correct. However, i was letting you know my assumption so that you could clarify in case my assumption was incorrect.
so, besides the presence of different languages today, why do you think the story of the tower of babel is true, if your belief has nothing to do with the bible itself? does this have more to do with the “Materialism” you’ve mentioned a few times?
“Like I said you can always run away as you have before but until Nate decides he wishes to change the way he moderates this board (which he will have to do to squelch my voice this time – actions have consequences) you will be called out on the inconsistent underpinnings of what you consider absurd and that IS your bias against the supernatural that can only exist because you dodge the issue.” – ABlacksmanagain
I dont think I’ve dodged anything. I’m happy to discuss whatever you like, it’s just that i dint know what you’re talking about or how it relates to the tower of babel. If you can recommend some reading material I will try to accommodate.
“the bible being absurd doesnt prove “materialism” nor does “materialism” being absurd prove the bible.” – me
“Sorry you make no sense whatsoever. Your definition of absurd is based on the plausibility of there only being the material and not the supernatural. You can dodge and dance all you wish. Absurd is a relative word to your presuppositions so in any debate/discussion with me i will raise the subject and you can either finally answer or babble on why you don’t need to. It won;t change my bringing it up.” – ABlacksman
I wasnt calling either absurd in the quote of mine you listed, jut trying to point out that even if both were absurd or not, does nothing to further or harm the other subject – as they don’t rely on each other. or did you mean to reply to different quote?
LikeLike
“Whats there to be confused about? Whats more difficult?” – ABlacksman
it was the way you worded it. and again, i dont know who krauss is or what he thinks – I’ll google him later.
I think you’ve clarified for me though, thanks.
Clones do make much more sense that spontaneous creation or existence from nothing.
LikeLike