₦airaland Forum

Ajilla:
personally, I don't think so

Ajilla:
Good morning nairalanders,
I have been unable to sleep for the past few weeks now due to the problem I am facing at the moment.
I proposed to my girlfriend that I av dated for two plus years now and she said yes but my family have refused to support my decision to marry her due to her father's reputation of being diabolical and extremely wicked.
The man in question has been separated from my girl and her mom since she was little(abt 5yrs old). My siblings really love the girl as she is very homely and loves my family the way I do, but ever since I proposed to her, talks abt the spiritual consequences of marrying her has been flying about.
Please I need ur advise, thanks

P.s: we are from the same village and u know in an Igbo community, you have to go to her father's to seek for her hand in marriage irregardless of her parents separation

yomi007k:
One question.
Is the father truly diabolical or extremely wicked?
I just want to know before I can comment.

Ajilla:
yes

MuttleyLaff:
When are you going to start not taking things personally, hmm?. Only HSP (i.e. highly sensitive person) behave this way. It is not a disorder, but it is majorly a symptom display of superficiality.

Have you read the four few easy, simple, direct and straightforward questions, I'll like jamesid29 responding to, and respond to, by giving the answers back, in the same numbered format, order and style they are asked?

Do you know that, its a hardest thing of all, to find a Tower of Babel black cat, in a dark room, especially if there is no Tower of Babel cat, in the first place, to be found?

You're a fantasist with delusions of grandeur, a mere ideologue. I am waiting for you and jamesid29 to "fact check" me, which I know youse never will, because the absolute truth is "inconvenient" for youse to take in and your weak stomachs to comfortably retain

FOLYKAZE:
Don't make it personal, you always go for the neck, I don't know why this.

Why can't you be original or use another phrase, instead of mindlessly parroting same word and expression I used on you, hmm?

[img]https://s7/images/MuttleyLaffJagaban.jpg[/img]
I normally suffer "the-not-in-know" gladly, but someone like you, who, in the first place, should know certain things as like about the "Tower of Babel" et cetera and even more for refusing to know better, I come hard on. I make no apology for playing hard or even about going for the jugular.

If you cant stand the pressure and/or sight of blood, then please wisely step back, gerrout and dont slam the door shut

FOLYKAZE:
Please read through Genesis 11:2-9 and you will find your answer therein. Please comply with my instructions.

shadeyinka:
Let me put the answer in a question form.

Let's assume you own a time machine and you can be present and see anything up to 20 years in the future.

Will you be able to describe the president of Nigeria come 2023 and even the one that will take over in 2028?
Will you be able to say if the new President in 2023 will have a baby girl (with his new wife), the name of the baby and if the baby will drown (but rescued in the nick of time) in the Aso villa swimming pool at the age of three?

Can it then be said that you know the future of the yet to be formed foetus of the yet to be president and his yet to be married wife?

FOLYKAZE:
[s]You have a lot to learn from jamesid29. You and Maximus69 have killed the vibes on this section honestly. See the topics making it to front page on Sundays, scanty and lacks deep contents. I believe you can up your game though.....

That aside, have you read the passage I asked you to read....? So we can progress[/s]

jamesid29:
Well, that's a bit incorrect boss. Outside of the Bible and the history of Isreal, the civilizations that developed in ancient mesopotamia are pretty much well attested for today. Compared to other civilizations that wrote on parchment that have either been destroyed or lost, the mesopotamian region wrote on clay tablets that even survived destruction of entire cities. Today we have thousands of tablets(the library in the British museum alone has about 30,000 tablets) dating back to the 3rd millennium BC, so there's really not much question about the significance of the etemenanki(atleast not in academia).We not only have enough textual sources for the ziggurat itself but also for the accompanying temple Esagila .

I believe this is where the misunderstandings steam from. Having this mindset about the Bible and even other ancient writings would cause a couple of problems
1) Almost everything in the ancient world has spiritual significance. The idea of separating the world into spiritual and physical, supernatural and natural, is a modern concept.. ancient people didn't see the world in those terms. Removing that component from the text automatically means removing an important piece away from it and most likely reading something foreign into it.
2) Though the Bible contains many different types of literature (history, poetry, biographies, apocalyptic etc), at its very core, the Bible is a theological book. Every statement,every story, even the genealogies have a specific messaging that is being transmitted. Striping that out is to misunderstand what the text is trying to communicate.
3) All literature is written against the backdrop of the culture that it's been written in. This is very important, because to read any text with a different cultural context is to read something into it that was not intended by the author. To illustrate this:Let's say I write something to you and say "Mehn bro, that car dey fly". You automatically get what I mean cos we both have the same cultural backdrop, but someone living 2000 yrs from now can easily misunderstand that statement to mean we were talking about flying cars. This is just a very mundane illustration but i hope it helps get my point across. The context of the Bible is not the 21st century,it's not the Catholic church or the Reformation, the context of the Bible is the cultural backdrop of the biblical authors. Anything outside of that is to read something foreign into the text or to miss the point the text is trying to make.

There's alot more we can talk about how we approach the Bible and other ancient texts in general but I'm trying to limit what I write... what I can assure is that no one in the ancient world would look at a ziggurat and think of space exploration or astronomy. A ziggurat in the ancient world was part of a temple complex and was sacred space

Ok so let me try and put the statement into perspective. A temple is the abode of the deity but a shrine is where cultic rituals are performed (reenactment of sacred marriages etc). A temple might have a shrine in it but not necessarily(most ground temples have shrines). What is not being disputed is whether a ziggurat is part of a temple complex (that part is well attested for by many sources), what is being disputed is whether cultic rituals were performed at the top of the ziggurat or inside it. On one hand Herodotus is considered the father of modern history and his words carry weight but on the other hand,there's no surviving ziggurat at its full height to examine if there are any relics from rituals left behind.
You can read the whole entry of the quote you posted from Harriet Crawford's book to understand whats actually being debated "Sumer and Sumerians pp 85-88". Here's a link to where you can borrow the book for free https://archive.org/details/sumersumerian00/
Or you can also read the entire paragraph you cropped the link out from... it gives the entire context of what Harriet was saying.

Let me just add one more thing, Wikipedia is a good place to start a research on a topic or just get general information.... but caveat lector.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source

I think my previous answers covers this part.
Basically all major cities in mesopotamia had temple complexes that incorporated ziggurats alongside it atleast as far back as the 3rd millennium BC. This is attested well in many ancient literatures

There's alot we can talk about the theological statement being made especially when you read the parallel accounts in Babylon literature, but to not make my post overtly long(as its too long at this point sef), I'll just try and make a very condensed version of what was going on and just touch 1 or 2 points.
1) The name of the ziggurat is Etemenanki meaning :House, foundation platform of the heaven & the underworld (earth for our understanding)
2) The name of the temple is Esagila meaning: House whose top is lofty
3) Babylon comes from the Akkadian word babili meaning: gate of the god(it's unclear whether this etymology reflect the original meaning of the name or a secondary interpretation).
The statement being made here is that the city is considered as the center of the cosmos (The place where heaven and earth meets; God's space and man's space intersect).... .To understand how this works is to understand that a ziggurat was not built for men to go up to heaven but for God to come down to earth and to reside in their midst in the temple. In the case of Babel, they were doing this not to honour God but to make a name for themselves(it's a play on the meaning of Shem). They wanted to create a symbiotic relationship with God on their own terms(this already shows they had a flawed concept about God)... This is a design pattern in the Bible called a bookend, in this case Genesis 3 and Genesis 11(paradise lost and how men are trying to regain paradise on their own terms out of pride).
God does come down with his entourage, then not only does he scatter them since they refuse to do that on their own but also disinherits the nations (Deut 32:8 ) since they were bent on renegading against Him. He then calls a man out of the same mesopotamia in the very next story and promises to make his name great and through his seed bless all the nations on the earth.
From this man comes the nation of Israel (who were meant to be a priest to the nations; God never left the nations without a witness)... From them comes the first time God dwells with people since Gen 3(the tarbancle and later the temple), which was always the plan. Later comes Jesus Christ, through whose sacrifice launches the new temple and grafting of all the nations back into the fold. That's the story in a nutshell...
There's a lot more to be said but there are already some really good answers here. I believe O\femmanu1 has some good answers that can help fill in some of the gaps.
There's still some debate on whether the biblical account is a polemic against Babylonian conception of the world or whether it's aimed at humanity in general. In either case though, the major theological messaging doesn't change much.

A lot of ancient structures were not simple but were advanced architectural design from Egypt to Rome to China etc. That doesn't change what their purpose was for.

Truvel:
Thanks, Bro 4 Ur Enlightenment. D Problems With Black Men Is Dat Dey Don't Read Or Are Lazy 2 Read.

Brachaa:
Hey! Hold it there. I already did as you said and dropped the matter. What's with the insults?
So much for a Christian.

FOLYKAZE:
Ok
Take you time tonight, read each words of Genesis 11 closely, and try to understand. Between the verses, you will find answer to your question. Please do that and get back sir

FOLYKAZE:
Gen 11 exooses the inefficiency of God, his shortcomings, and lack of foresights, for thwarting a project which would expand his ministrations many years after.

Can't just wrap my head around it, that Muttley don't know Etemenanki Ziggurat is the Tower of Babel. It sickening, even more, that Muttley thinks the East direction implies ungodliness. To add salt to injury, muttley thinks human language was confounded at Babel, but concluded Shem and Japheth descents who were not in Babel or partook in the building of Tower, had their tongue magically confounded. He however lost along the line, when, where and how the descent of Shem and Japheth got their language confused since they weren't in Babel or partook in the building of the Tower.

Muttley baba! I hail

MuttleyLaff:
Now I am in dire need of an interlocutor, preferably an ardent supporter of 2 Timothy 2:15, to show in the Bible, where it is largely, plus clearly stated and done in detail, leaving no room, for confusion, guessing or doubt, that before the disruption, a physical structure tower, as in like, one made of straw bricks, whatnots and mortar, circa Genesis Chapter 11, ever was built. Now this request, needs to be done, without make claims outside what is black and white or even red, written in the Bible.

Truvel:
Who Knows D Difference Btw A Seer & A Prophet?

shadeyinka:
From God!
An example
2 Kin 20:1:
"In those days was Hezekiah sick to death.
And the prophet Isaiah the son of Amoz came to him, and said to him,
Thus said the LORD, Set your house in order; for you shall die, and not live."

But Hezekiah prayed. His action saved his life and health.

This is also true within the constraints surrounding the person

shadeyinka:
Yes, a complex plot of things. Just a minimal intervention by the Divine so as not to upset the balance of Freewill, Cause and Effect.

shadeyinka:
Even with a sneak preview into the future, the future can be changed, delayed or modified with wisdom.

shadeyinka:
It's amazing how even the little things we do affect greatly the future. If one married another person other than one's spouse, it is impossible for out offsprings to remain the same. Everything changes! The assassination of a single man Archduke Franz Ferdinand led to the WW1.

I hope my not taking Cornflakes for breakfast this morning will somehow lead to Nigeria choosing a Messiah President in 2023. LOL!

Shalom

Csonice1:
hurray!
but you got a poor grade at the end.

Csonice1:
God knows possibilities from the beginning. for the sake of the choice given to man; they can choose any path. God knows where each path will lead to, even though it may seem right unto a man, the end may be destruction vice versa.

Csonice1:
The project wasn't the problem, the unity wasn't the problem; the motive behind it, was.

They wanted to make a name for themselves and remain in a single place (but God's word must be fulfilled); they were not doing it to Glorify God but to make a boast of strength in themselves: God forbids that. God also knew what he had put in a man, and it was best to give them different languages.

MuttleyLaff:
"⁹He became a fearlessf hunter in defiance ofg the LORD.
That is why it is said, “Like Nimrod, a fearless hunter in defiance of and/or before the LORD.”
¹⁰His kingdom began in the regioni of Shinar with the cities of Babylon, Erech, Akkad, and Calneh."
- Genesis 10:9-10

Of course, we were given a preview of Nimrod's character, make up, earlier life and antecedents at Genesis 10:9-10 before that, the infamous event, that happened at Genesis 11:2-4.

Nimrod, was a badass person, so Genesis 10:9 tells us, so due to the sort of person he was, he was the person who led the "they" to go plan, to gather together and make a name for themselves etcetera

Canaan was Nimrod's uncle. True, Cush was Nimrod's father ‎and it was Canaan who was cursed to be a servants of servants to his brothers etcetera. It is probably partly trying to shake off the curse of association, with Canaan, his uncle and Ham his grandfather, that was what propelled Nimrod to be more rebellious, audacious and ambitious.

So, yup, Nimrod and Co, the descendants of Ham, that's Ham, who was neither blessed nor cursed by Noah, were envious of Shem, whose name has two meanings. The first meaning is, "renown", "be known", "make a name for self" "have a prominent name for self" et cetera. The second/alternate/parallel meaning of Shem, is, "dusky red", dusky complexion, complexion with some degree of dark coloration or olive coloured et cetera.

It is the first meaning, that's of particular interest here. The descendants of Ham, we're envious of Shem and his descendants' legacy. They, talking of Ham's descendants because of something in their gene, that still filtered through even after the flood destroying all bad people, coveted Shem and his descendants' heritage and so too, wanted to make a name for themselves, wanted to have name for themselves too, wanted to be renowned, be known all over the world, just the way Noah pronounced that blessing on Shem and his descendants. The descendants of Ham wanted all this, not because of God, not for the glory of God even not to glorify God by it, but was for the self centred reason of be known all over the place for themselves too. They wanted to make and have a name too for themselves.

Lastly and very significantly to note, is that, also, the erection of the tower, was going to typically reminiscence ‎Genesis 4:26b. It was literally them going to use the Tower to profane God's name. The final and successful erection of the high riding pointing in the sky tower, was going to be a symbol of sticking the middle finger up at God, with it, as if saying, go "F" yourself. God wasn't having any of that effrontery. He's had enough of Nimrod and the descendants of Ham's insolence and bad behaviour, that He came down to throw a spanner in their thoughts and so their plan effectively was disrupted.

Man looks at outward appearance, but God looks at the heart. God could see and smell them from 10 miles away, so before they got started, God came down to throw a spanner into their works.‎ Their plan was to make that the first tower and then replicate it to other places. That wasn't going to happen.

Yes, Nimrod and his company, attempted building the tower to get a name for themselves, have their own god(s) and be their own god, having no need for God and no need to call on His name.

FOLYKAZE:
Oh! I like that you don't give it unnecessary twist.
The project wasn't the problem, but even when it will be beneficial to God's ministrations, he never foresaw that and thwarted that brilliant project. We have today numerous modern architecture designs that followed the style of Ziggurat, these buildings are found across the world. The Ziggurat was designed as a doorstep into heavens, that is why it is called Etemenanki, the name for the structure, is Sumerian and means "temple of the foundation of heaven and earth". Etemenanki gives rises to space exploration and architectural revolutions we have today.

There are two problems in your submissions.

Firstly, why should God be given glory for what he didn't do by himself? It's like giving the glory for inventing airplane to God, when in fact, it is the Wright brothers who designed and innovated airplanes.

Secondly, I read through Genesis 9 to 10 and 11. What is wrong with civilizations? These people wanted to become city dwellers but God wanted them to wander around like animals in the bush. Is it God idea that human should live in isolation?

Genesis 10:5 By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.

Genesis 10:20 These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, and in their nations.

If the incidents in Gen 10 predate Gen 11, these people are not isolated. They are already doing well in different countries, nations and cities. They also speak different languages.

jamesid29:
Cc FOLYKAZE... So following the conversation for a while , I must say, it's a bit refreshing to see a critic of the scriptures that actually takes their time to read what the text actually says rather than what they remember from Sunday school.

So out of curiosity, since you already know what was been built at Babel was a ziggurat

Why do you still hold that God's action of scattering the people was because of their mere unity in building a tower?

FOLYKAZE:
That is largely, what is stated in the bible. It could be something else, but I won't make claims outside what is in the bible

jamesid29:
Yeah, you are right about it being a ziggurat and also that it's most likely the ziggurat named Etemenanki boss (I don't think there are many people in academia that would disagree with you on this).
I think where the misconception steams from is that you misunderstand the cultural significance of a ziggurat and what it is built for. I believe if you take a dive into what it is and it's significance in ancient mesopotamia, it would change your reading of Genesis 11.

MuttleyLaff:
Smh. Ogbeni, mister man the tower was not physically built, it was a proposal that didnt get its foot off the ground. When would you start exactly reading what you see in the Bible, just the way its printed, huh?

Watch this. FOLYKAZE, lets go on a shopping spree. Please tell tomorrow, if we really and actually went on the shopping spree. Smh. KMT.

Oh yes he does. He corroborates my submission that the descendant of Ham led by Nimrod, the rebel, moved east, symbolically meaning, they move away, in defiance, from the influence, protection and covering of God

Csonice1:
Since you are desperate for an answer,

Csonice1:
I will answer you but you have to be sincere and ready to learn.

Csonice1:
Firstly, you said that the sons of God in those verses were special kind of men (I wonder where you got that from)

Csonice1:
Now again you are saying that God is the Father of constellations; are we in an astrology class

Csonice1:

[s]CHAPTER1: THEY ARE LED BY THE SPIRIT
Like I pointed out earlier(from your comment): it's true that as many as are led by the spirit, they are the sons of God: and I was telling you that if that's the criteria for becoming the sons of God (and of course it is)
then, angels are the sons of God
[Ezekiel 1:4-20, Ezekiel 10:20] [/s]

Csonice1:

CHAPTER2: THERE IS NO MALE OR FEMALE
you were having issue understanding Genesis 6:1,2,4.
Now this is the truth:There is no male or female in the Kingdom of Heaven; especially amongst angels. All Angels are usually addressed as masculine, besides I've not come across a female angel so to speak. (not in the Bible)
Now I'm going to give us scriptural witnesses which I'm going to quote at length, to add context to it:

Luke 20:35-38
But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry, nor are given in marriage:
36 Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.
37 Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
38 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto him."
second witness;

Galatians3:26-28
"26:For in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God through faith
27:For as many [of you] as were baptized into Christ [into a spiritual union and communion with Christ, the Anointed One, the Messiah] have put on (clothed yourselves with) Christ.
28:There is [now no distinction] neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is not male and female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus."

angels are prohibited from marrying, and are all addressed as sons by their Maker who knows the truth stated above.
Moreover, when their offsprings emerged, it was obvious that they weren't Just humans.

Csonice1:
CHAPTER3: FAST FORWARD TO RECENT HISTORY (IN THE SAME VENUE)
As for Job 1:6, Job 2:1-7, the sons of God stated here are Angels.

This event happened in God's presence and later in history, another event occured.
Revelation 12:7-12
And there was war in heaven: Michael and his angels fought against the dragon; and the dragon fought and his angels,
8 And prevailed not; neither was their place found any more in heaven.
9 And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.
10 And I heard a loud voice saying in heaven, Now is come salvation, and strength, and the kingdom of our God, and the power of his Christ: for the accuser of our brethren is cast down, which accused them before our God day and night.
11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.
12 Therefore rejoice, ye heavens, and ye that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabiters of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down unto you, having great wrath, because he knoweth that he hath but a short time."

Csonice1:
CHAPTER 4:THE MORNING STAR
Having said much already: I will make Job 38:7 breif (hope you will understand)
The morning Star is an office in heaven; whosoever qualifies for it occupies it.
Satan was an occupant of that office, till he disqualified himself.
Isaiah 14:12
"How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! (morning star) how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!"

Now Jesus is the overseer over that office.
Revelation 22:16
"I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, and the bright and morning star
[ for other angelic offices read
Revelation 1:20, Revelation 9:1-2 compare with Revelation 20:1-3]

CHAPTER5:THE FATHER OF LIGHTS
God is not the Father of constellations as you know it. He is the Father of lights and that light is recorded in John1:4&5
"1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men."

With all I've said, angels are sons of God. However, there is a Hierachy.
shalom.

shadeyinka:
True!

I agree with you here

I think it is easy to understand. The key is that we are not saved because we are perfect in our deeds. We are saved by grace through faith.

1Jn 2:1:
"My little children, I'm writing these things to you so that you might not sin. Yet if anyone does sin, we have an advocate with the Father Jesus, the Messiah, one who is righteous."

What qualifies us eventually for salvation is our SONSHIP of God not our perfect life. Hence, when Satan brings his accusations, he may be correct but our advocate says: for these imperfections in their lives I died. I have paid their price of guilt therefore they are free to go!

This is like the episode that took place with Joshua the High Priest

Zech 3:1-5:
"And he showed me Joshua the high priest standing before the angel of the LORD, and Satan standing at his right hand to resist him. And the LORD said to Satan, The LORD rebuke you, O Satan; even the LORD that has chosen Jerusalem rebuke you: is not this a brand plucked out of the fire? Now Joshua was clothed with filthy garments, and stood before the angel. And he answered and spoke to those that stood before him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from him. And to him he said, Behold, I have caused your iniquity to pass from you, and I will clothe you with change of raiment. And I said, Let them set a fair turban on his head. So they set a fair turban on his head, and clothed him with garments. And the angel of the LORD stood by."

Joshua wasn't pure but he had a relationship with God to be excused of his filth AND be Restored to cleanliness.

This is our take in God as explained in the text you presented.
I am saved, not because I am perfect but only because I have run to God for my salvation and deliverance. The blood of Jesus thus speaks for me and the price of my guilt paid. Hence, who (specifically refering to Satan) can accuse me who God has paid his fine.

@Bolded
For those who has imbibed Gods sacrifice, and have been converted into His sons, it is the blood of atonement that takes them into paradise NOT their works.

Eph 2:8-9:
"For by grace are you saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."
Secondly,
God does intervene in the affairs of men, howbeit not every time.
When this happens, we call it MIRACLE! A miracle occurs when God suspends the normal course of events

shadeyinka:
I'm still trying to understand your simple English.
I'll holla you when I'm through. LOL

Shalom

shadeyinka:
You are correct here!

Foreknowledge isn't Predestination.

If you looked at the verses 29-30, Foreknowledge came FIRST and based on that infallible Foreknowledge of God a Predestination was Done.

If there was no Foreknowledge before the predestination then what we have is a DETERMISM and freewill wouldn't exist. If there is no freewill, SIN will not also exist!

Blabbermouth:
Honestly, I understand you completely. However my question still stands and I will prefer a binary YES or NO answer.
According to God's foreknowledge, "in the next 10 years I bought a buggati veyron for my daughter"... Can I with the power of freewill decide not to buy a Bugatti veyron and buy her a mansion instead?

FOLYKAZE:
[s]Hahahaha

I have most time wondered, how old is this muttley guy that be wants mudslinging all his life?[/s]

FOLYKAZE:
[s]Quit this childishness. I am not available for the banter tradings.

You have long lost touch with the discussion on this thread. You were here telling us Ham descendants conspired with Nimrod to build a tower. Descendants of Shem and Japheth were excluded in your own thinking. However, you turned around and said these people who were not involved got equal and effective reaction of an action they are not partying in. How is it possible? It is basically illogical. I am giving you for an umpteenth time an opportunity to explain yourself, tell us when and how descent of Shem and Japheth got their language confounded if they weren't part of the construction of the tower.

Indeed you have lost touch with reality.

Genesis 11:5-6
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

In the OP, I said they were progressing with actualisation of the project. The verses above showed they already made a progress.

And the progress gave birth to what we know today as Ziggurat. Ziggurat is a physical structure sir. And the Bible verse above shows they had physically and progressively built a structure in Babel.

Rain and sunshine, unless in rare conditions like in the days of Noah and Joshua, are natural/neutral occurrence by God, rather than been punitive measure caused by God for the action and inaction of men.

Confounding of human language only happened in Babel, as recorded in the bible. You have pointed out that descent of Shem and Japheth were not in Babel or took part in the tower building, but somehow, magically severally punished for an action they were not involved.

Genesis 11:8-9
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[c]—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

From Babel, God scattered the whole human populace over all the earth. While rather you posit, contrary to what the Bible said, that descent of Shem and Japheth were not party in the babel construction, did not gather but spread out on their own, and magically lost their original tongue.

Verse 9 pointed out at Babel, the Lord confused the language of the whole world. The whole world populace were involved at the babel construction, and they equally got punished for their action.

Oga shatap abeg.

You have agreed there is no evidence Nimrod built the tower in the bible, and that claim are rooted only in Christian tradition.

It is what it is Muttley.

Mathew claim the people journeyed from Assyria without any evidence in the bible.

And the migration pattern is geographical, not having any spiritual undertone

Hahahahaha

I have read Genesis 10 over and over. All I found is heap of cowdung available for a pack on your doorstep.

Firstly, Genesis 10:20 These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their countries, and in their nations.

If the incident in Genesis 10 predate Genesis 11, descents of Ham had multiplied in their thousands, spoke different language, spread over different countries and nations.

I would want Petra1 to understand Gen 10:25 doesn't imply continental shift. Gen 10:25 has been explained in Genesis 10:5 By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations. Tongues before babel.

A better translation holds that peleg is racial divide.

MSG
Arphaxad had Shelah and Shelah had Eber. Eber had two sons, Peleg (so named because in his days the human race divided) and Joktan.

TLB
Two sons were born to Eber: Peleg (meaning “Division,” for during his lifetime the people of the world were separated and dispersed), and Joktan (Peleg’s brother).

GNT
Eber had two sons: one was named Peleg, because during his time the people of the world were divided; and the other was named Joktan.

AMP
Two sons were born to Eber; the name of one was Peleg (division), for [the inhabitants of] the earth were divided in his days; and his brother’s name was Joktan.

I am not ready for mudslinging Muttley. And already told you what I thought you meant which you have already corrected... God is in the east.. And satan is in the west. Hahahaha[/s]

Csonice1:
don't make me think you are not a Christian.
I remain silent here.

Whats that meant to mean?
Deal with the truth advanced you, and refrain from going to make off tangent comments

shadeyinka:
@Blabbermouth:

You are a secondary school teacher. You teach mathematics. You need to leave your students alone in the class while you go to the principals office for a few minutes.

You foreknow that your students will begin to make noise after you leave the class. You infact can predict the ring leaders of the noise makers.

Now, you leave the class for 5minuites and your student begin to make noise.

Will it be correct to accuse YOU of making the noise makers to make noise?

delkuf:
God bless you. I love what you wrote here

jesusjnr2020:
[s]It's not intended for that purpose. You've obviously seen how I've tried to ignore him while he's been getting at me relentlessly, so I thought it wise to give him a little taste of his own medicine so he'd know what it really feels like.[/s]

Yinmu, yẹyẹ dey smell narcissist tool. Yarning trash as usual.

Why not list all your proofs of your fantasised ideas you have of and about your made-up lie of "he's been getting at me relentlessly" hmm?

I won't even get at you, if you were on fire and about burning to death, I'll rather piss on you, to help you put out the flames
Smh. "ẹrin ẹ npami, nitoripe, abosi akan, omi ni ootu".

Csonice1:
your first sentence is true, I don't know about the other ones.

from the first sentence, I can assure you that the Spirit of God (the Spirit of Christ) leads the angels of God. refer to Ezekiel's vision of God.

1. Genesis6:2&4 There was a difference between the sons of God and the daughters of men. any source saying that they are all humans is questionable.

2. Job1:6,2:1 Satan came together with them, remember who Satan was before he lost his office and became an accuser of the brethren. The Bible here is talking about angels.

3. Job38:7 man had not been created when the sons of God shouted for joy: when God was creating the Earth.

Blabbermouth:
MuttleyLaff: God knows what I will do in the next 10 years...
For example...
According to God's foreknowledge, "in the next 10 years I bought a buggati veyron for my daughter"... Can I with the power of freewill decide not to buy a Bugatti veyron and buy her a mansion instead?

Blabbermouth:
What say ye, sir MuttleyLaff?

Blabbermouth:
Perhaps I might not even have a complete grasp of your kind of freewill.

Blabbermouth:
Actually, i'm cool with your answer to the question. However, it's evident that everyone has different stance concerning the matter.
JW believe in God using selective foreknowledge

Blabbermouth:
YOU believe in God using Absolute Foreknowledge

Blabbermouth:
JesusJnr and Haddeylium believe in God using Man's freewill (independent variable) to construct His foreknowledge of the future (which is a dependent variable)...
My questions to JJ was to make sure I understand him completely.

Blabbermouth:
If I'm to settle with your stance, however we try to shadowbox and sugarcoat things, we will have to remove free will completely.

Blabbermouth:
I went through it again... Before I make my final deductions, do you....
1. Believe in Freewill?

Blabbermouth:
2. Believe that man ordains his own future

Blabbermouth:
3. Can God know what a man will choose (say, next year) before he (the man) ordains it

jesusjnr2020:
[s]Lol!

Obviously you have no iota of shame if after all you claim about me, you still chasing after me as though you couldn't breathe without me.

I have proven beyond any reasonable doubt that you're a worthless and base fellow who's not worth my attention by the way I've completely ignored your open display of your foolishness and stupidity times without number on this forum. Even when I returned I never for once even with the other moniker quoted you or mentioned you to prove that you're as good as non-existent to me.

But you've obviously proven that you're actually the one that needs help...you just couldn't stay away from me for long. Is it an obsession or maybe that's how you gays keep chasing after your fellow men even though they would have absolutely nothing to do with your kind, thinking that one day you would eventually succeed in committing the abominable act with them?

Well know for a fact that before such a greivous sin could possibly happen, one of us would be dead because it's over my dead body.

You must have been completely fooled to think that those of us who believed your stupidity was not worth dignifying with a response were feeble because we chose to ignore you. If anything you should respect us for showing the extent of tolerance of your display of stupidity and foolishness for so long.[/s]

Blabbermouth:
From this, I believe you are saying that the future is like a dice (multiple possible outcomes) and man's freewill is what determines the result. You said "God knew it could pan out either way and he's prepared for whatever comes....." , that would mean God knows every possible outcome but he doesn't know the final outcome - If this is not what you mean then there is no room for freewill whatever.

Blabbermouth:
In this section, I believe you are claiming now that God knows the exact outcome and not just the multiple possible outcomes- this is what being omniscient ( and knowing the future) means - If so, then again there is no room for freewill

Blabbermouth:
Everyone (except MuttleyLaff though) is trying to stitch God's omniscience along with man's freewill, if that omniscience involves the future, then freewill is just a fantasy.
It's been a while... I've been good.