The Tower Of Babel

[irishman]

Imust be color blind, but I see people as people, and all need the same Savior.

 

With that said, I don't know any more than anyone else whether the races originated at Babel, but it sounds reasonable to me.  The Bible makes it clear that God confounded the languages to separate them (so much for unions!) but it would take years for them to discover who spoke one language or another with so many people obviously present.  The color and facial features would make it much easier to identify with those of like tongue.  Just my thoughts on the matter. (I may not be available for replies, so have at it!)

[HappyChristian]

Out of Africa theory? Not quite...best begin looking deeper into creation and God's mighty handiwork.  Evolution is the changing of a species into something completely different.  Any species that exists takes on traits of its forbears. Human or animal. That isn't evolution. That's genetics, and it's fact.  Not theory.  

 

Everyone of us has the potential to look a certain way - created in us via the creation of Adam and Eve.  Those looks are influenced by mixing and matching of breeding. It's a proven fact for anyone who wants to take the time to look into it....but sometimes it's just easier to high-handedly label people when one doesn't understand...

 

The Bible specifically states that all men spoke one language: that specifically contradicts evolution, because it shows that language did not evolve as many evolutionists like to say it did (going from animal sounds to speech, to language).   

 

The people of the earth were journeying together, they stopped to dwell and decided to build a tower to Heaven - in direct opposition to God's command to populate the earth.

 

So God confounded their language and scattered them all over the earth.  Where is Shinar?  In point of fact, it doesn't really matter whether Shinar is in Africa, Asia, or was on the American continent (I know, it wasn't...).  They were scattered all over from that place.  

 

Was the language confounding based on color of skin?  Not likely, since there were a lot of different languages created (linguistics is a fascinating study - it shows the relation of languages to each other that is just mind-boggling and such proof of an orderly God!).   Genesis 10 tells us that the people were divided by family groups:  "after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, after their nations."  Yes, chapter 10 is placed before the Tower...but chapter 10 lists the genealogy far beyond the time of Babel.  And it proves that people gathered in their groups and moved to certain areas.

 

And so, what happens when a group of people interbreed?  Well, certain characteristics - which are present in all human beings - begin to dominate.  That is simple genetics, you know. Not evolution.  And when a group only breeds within that group, their characteristics mark them as being quite different from others.

 

Japheth's descendants moved to western Asia and Europe.  Ham's descendents moved to Egypt and that area (oh no....not OUT of Africa, but INTO it...hmmmm).  Shem's moved to the middle east and southern asia.  The Bible tells us that, not evolutionists.  And they moved after the confounding of the languages, not before.  Because before they were travelling together before.  The Bible tells us so.

 

In all actuality, God's awesome creative power is magnified when looking at this.  God created our genetics to do what they do.  And they were mightily in evidence with the replenishing of the earth into peoples of various nations...

 

 

[OLD fashioned preacher]

Exactly. We actually see the same thing after the flood. We have a rich abundance of diversity in the animal kingdom today that began as simple 2 and 7 of each species - not every breed of every species. Humankind is the same way. And there's nothing evolutionary about it! 

Unless you meant sevens verses seven then I'm going to disagree. The Bible said:  Gen 7:2  Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. 

Gen 7:3  Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth. (emphasis mine)

 

You cannot count male, female, etc and get 7, the wording of "by sevens" and "the male AND" denotes 7 sets of two (think back to elementary math and "sets") making 14 of each clean beast and 14 of each fowl.

 

I'm not emphatic on the unclean because the the flow could denote the uniformity of sets (4 total) but the change in wording from sevens to two probably indicates a change from sets to raw number (2 each). 

[HappyChristian]

 

Unless you meant sevens verses seven then I'm going to disagree. The Bible said:  Gen 7:2  Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. 

Gen 7:3  Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth. (emphasis mine)

 

You cannot count male, female, etc and get 7, the wording of "by sevens" and "the male AND" denotes 7 sets of two (think back to elementary math and "sets") making 14 of each clean beast and 14 of each fowl.

 

I'm not emphatic on the unclean because the the flow could denote the uniformity of sets (4 total) but the change in wording from sevens to two probably indicates a change from sets to raw number (2 each). 

 

Yes, that is what I meant.  I know sets of 2 would be needed.     Thanks for clarifying for me. 

[Salyan]

I was taught it was actually seven beasts - 3 pairs and 1 for a sacrifice.

[HappyChristian]

I was taught it was actually seven beasts - 3 pairs and 1 for a sacrifice.

I've always heard that the way the seven was worded (plural) indicated seven of each gender.  Because they would be used for sacrifice and eating, there needed to be a goodly number for reproduction. Although what you've said could do it, too.

[JerryNumbers]

Its sad there's so many color blind people that miss out on many of the wonderful colors that God has given us to enjoy.

 

Seeing that God made His people in different colors is not racist its seeing things as God made them.

[Ukulelemike]

 

Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. 

 

We are one race created in the image of God.

 

This separating and dividing is of the world and creates all kinds of contention and discrimination.

 

Actually, it was God who created the differences and separations-He had a reason, as well: the people were commanded to overspread the entire earth, but they refused, so God forced them by separating their languages, bringing about distrust among them, and the resulting separation.

 

And in fact, the entire Bible, and obedience to God, has always been based upon separation of one sort or another, be it separation from a specific tree in the garden, or the sons of God from the daughters of men, or the Hebrews from certain foods, or separating seeds and fabrics, and now, separating from false doctrines, false prophets, and contentious and erring brethren. Separation is from God, when done correctly, and can be very honoring to Him.

 

Now, man likes to separate for the wrong reasons-we add reasons that the Bible doesn't condone, and that's wrong. Some of God's commands of separation have been removed by Him, like the foods and such, while some are still in place.

[Ukulelemike]

I've always heard that the way the seven was worded (plural) indicated seven of each gender.  Because they would be used for sacrifice and eating, there needed to be a goodly number for reproduction. Although what you've said could do it, too.

Actually, until Sinai, all the animals could be eaten, but I believe, in the long run, you're still correct, because there would need to be plenty when the time came.

[heartstrings]

Then why were some called "clean" back when they entered the ark? And weren't those the ones Noah sacrificed?

[Ukulelemike]

Then why were some called "clean" back when they entered the ark? And weren't those the ones Noah sacrificed?

You answered your own question, since they didn't eat them before the flood, and after the flood, Noah was told that ALL lviing flesh was for food. There wasn't any restrictions until Sinai-it was sacrifice.

 

And honestly, for all we know, the 'clean' animals may have been different than the clean animals given on Sinai. Probably not, but the Bible doesn't say. Just something to think about.

[OLD fashioned preacher]

I was taught it was actually seven beasts - 3 pairs and 1 for a sacrifice.

The only problem I have with that is the wording of "by sevens, the male AND HIS FEMALE" (caps mine) in Gen 7:2

[Salyan]

Yeah, that actually makes more sense.

[Ukulelemike]

The only problem I have with that is the wording of "by sevens, the male AND HIS FEMALE" (caps mine) in Gen 7:2

Which is why I understand it as seven males, seven females. That's the only way that makes sense. We have, for too long, accepted into popular conscience, so to speak, as two-by-two, but that's only part of the story.

[No Nicolaitans]

I was taught it was actually seven beasts - 3 pairs and 1 for a sacrifice.

 

That's how I always saw it too Salyan...until...

 

The only problem I have with that is the wording of "by sevens, the male AND HIS FEMALE" (caps mine) in Gen 7:2

 

OFP pointed this out.  How many times have I read that and not caught it? Lord, forgive me...

 

Thank you OFP for pointing that out.