XI.
When God Smoked a Ziggurat
Ge 11:1 And all the earth had one language and one tongue.
2 And it came about that in their wandering from the east, they came to a stretch of flat country in the land of Shinar, and there they made their living-place.
3 And they said one to another, Come, let us make bricks, burning them well. And they had bricks for stone, putting them together with sticky earth.
4 And they said, Come, let us make a town, and a tower whose top will go up as high as heaven; and let us make a great name for ourselves, so that we may not be wanderers over the face of the earth.
5 And the Lord came down to see the town and the tower which the children of men were building.
6 And the Lord said, See, they are all one people and have all one language; and this is only the start of what they may do: and now it will not be possible to keep them from any purpose of theirs.
7 Come, let us go down and take away the sense of their language, so that they will not be able to make themselves clear to one another.
8 So the Lord God sent them away into every part of the earth: and they gave up building their town.
9 So it was named Babel, because there the Lord took away the sense of all languages and from there the Lord sent them away over all the face of the earth.
(BBE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRwe6gvL-I8
Years ago, Cornelius Ryan wrote a book about the Battle of the Bulge called "A Bridge Too Far" about how one portion of the Allied Army pushed too far ahead in the fighting in Germany and the Germans started a run with their tanks to cut that portion off from the rest of the forces. That ended in failure.
Nimrod's forces or some remnant of that united front forged into the area that would become Babylon, perhaps pursuing Eden which had been in that area but must have vanished with the Flood. Instead, they found the muddy wetland. apparently farther than they had gone before. A land too far and too far past the limit of God's willingness to permit what they proceeded to do.
Matt Henry:
INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS CHAPTER 11
The old distinction between the sons of God and the sons of men (professors and profane) survived the flood, and now appeared again, when men began to multiply: according to this distinction we have, in this chapter,
I. The dispersion of the sons of men at Babel, Ge 11:1-9, where we have,
1. Their presumptuous provoking design, which was to build a city and a tower, Ge 11:1-4.
2. The righteous judgment of God upon them in disappointing their design, by confounding their language, and so scattering them, Ge 11:5-9.
II. The pedigree of the sons of God down to Abraham (Ge 11:10-26), with a general account of his family, and removal out of his native country, Ge 11:27-32.
Ver. 1.
The close of the foregoing chapter tells us that by the sons of Noah, or among the sons of Noah, the nations were divided in the earth after the flood, that is, were distinguished into several tribes or colonies; and, the places having grown too strait for them, it was either appointed by Noah, or agreed upon among his sons, which way each several tribe or colony should steer its course, beginning with the countries that were next them, and designing to proceed further and further, and to remove to a greater distance from each other, as the increase of their several companies should require. Thus was the matter well settled, one hundred years after the flood, about the time of Peleg's birth; but the sons of men, it should seem, were loath to disperse into distant places; they thought the more the merrier and the safer, and therefore they contrived to keep together, and were slack to go to possess the land which the Lord God of their fathers had given them (Jos 18:3), thinking themselves wiser than either God or Noah. Now here we have,
I. The advantages which befriended their design of keeping together,
1. They were all of one language, Ge 11:1. If there were any different languages before the flood, yet Noah's only, which it is likely was the same with Adam's, was preserved through the flood, and continued after it. Now, while they all understood one another, they would be the more likely to love one another, and the more capable of helping one another, and the less inclinable to separate one from another.
2. They found a very convenient commodious place to settle in (Ge 11:2), a plain in the land of Shinar, a spacious plain, able to contain them all, and a fruitful plain, able, according as their present numbers were, to support them all, though perhaps they had not considered what room there would be for them when their numbers should be increased. Note, Inviting accommodations, for the present, often prove too strong temptations to the neglect of both duty and interest, as it respects futurity.
II. The method they took to bind themselves to one another, and to settle together in one body. Instead of coveting to enlarge their borders by a peaceful departure under the divine protection, they contrived to fortify them, and, as those that were resolved to wage war with Heaven, they put themselves into a posture of defense. Their unanimous resolution is, Let us build ourselves a city and a tower. It is observable that the first builders of cities, both in the old world (Ge 4:17), and in the new world here, were not men of the best character and reputation: tents served God's subjects to dwell in; cities were first built by those that were rebels against him and revolters from him. Observe here,
1. How they excited and encouraged one another to set about this work. They said, Go to, let us make brick (Ge 11:3), and again, (Ge 11:4), Go to, let us build ourselves a city; by mutual excitements they made one another more daring and resolute. Note, Great things may be brought to pass when the undertakers are numerous and unanimous, and stir up one another. Let us learn to provoke one another to love and to good works, as sinners stir up and encourage one another to wicked works. See Ps 122:1; Isa 2:3,5; Jer 50:5.
2. What materials they used in their building. The country, being plain, yielded neither stone nor mortar, yet this did not discourage them from their undertaking, but they made brick to serve instead of stone, and slime or pitch instead of mortar. See here,
(1.) What shift those will make that are resolute in their purposes: were we but zealously affected in a good thing, we should not stop our work so often as we do, under pretence that we want conveniences for carrying it on.
(2.) What a difference there is between men's building and God's; when men build their Babel, brick and slime are their best materials; but, when God builds his Jerusalem, he lays even the foundations of it with sapphires, and all its borders with pleasant stones, Isa 54:11-12; Re 21:19.
3. For what ends they built. Some think they intended hereby to secure themselves against the waters of another flood. God had told them indeed that he would not again drown the world; but they would trust to a tower of their own making, rather than to a promise of God's making or an ark of his appointing. If, however, they had had this in their eye, they would have chosen to build their tower upon a mountain rather than upon a plain, but three things, it seems, they aimed at in building this tower:--
(1.) It seems designed for an affront to God himself; for they would build a tower whose top might reach to heaven, which bespeaks a defiance of God, or at least a rivalry with him. They would be like the Most High, or would come as near him as they could, not in holiness but in height. They forgot their place, and, scorning to creep on the earth, resolved to climb to heaven, not by the door or ladder, but some other way.
(2.) They hoped hereby to make themselves a name; they would do something to be talked of now, and to give posterity to know that there had been such men as they in the world. Rather than die and leave no memorandum behind them, they would leave this monument of their pride, and ambition, and folly. Note,
[1.] Affectation of honor and a name among men commonly inspires with a strange ardor for great and difficult undertakings, and often betrays to that which is evil and offensive to God.
[2.] It is just with God to bury those names in the dust which are raised by sin. These Babel-builders put themselves to a great deal of foolish expense to make themselves a name; but they could not gain even this point, for we do not find in any history the name of so much as one of these Babel-builders. Philo Judaeus says, They engraved every one his name upon a brick, in perpetuam rei memoriam--as a perpetual memorial; yet neither did this serve their purpose.
(3.) They did it to prevent their dispersion: Lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth.
"It was done" (says Josephus) "in disobedience to that command (Ge 9:1), Replenish the earth."
God orders them to disperse.
"No," say they, "we will not, we will live and die together."
In order hereunto, they engage themselves and one another in this vast undertaking. That they might unite in one glorious empire, they resolve to build this city and tower, to be the metropolis of their kingdom and the centre of their unity. It is probable that the band of ambitious Nimrod was in all this. He could not content himself with the command of a particular colony, but aimed at universal monarchy, in order to which, under pretence of uniting for their common safety, he contrives to keep them in one body, that, having them all under his eye, he might not fail to have them under his power. See the daring presumption of these sinners. Here is,
[1.] A bold opposition to God:
"You shall be scattered," says God.
"But we will not," say they.
Woe unto him that thus strives with his maker.
[2.] A bold competition with God. It is God's prerogative to be universal monarch, Lord of all, and King of kings; the man that aims at it offers to step into the throne of God, who will not give his glory to another.
Recall we mentioned Nimrod seems to have melded the old gods with the goddess system so both could be worshiped and people could be unified. That new religion now finds a home in a tower with a temple on top. The purpose was worship, but also a study of the heavens, where the gods might reside. Hence astrology began around this time, too. One god/goddess from that time rings very familiar to us today:
.
(A little further on the Bible tells us that Abram came from Ur. That "sin"
was chosen as the name for all evil doings says a lot about the nature of worship for this god. W)
When God Smoked a Ziggurat
Ge 11:1 And all the earth had one language and one tongue.
2 And it came about that in their wandering from the east, they came to a stretch of flat country in the land of Shinar, and there they made their living-place.
3 And they said one to another, Come, let us make bricks, burning them well. And they had bricks for stone, putting them together with sticky earth.
4 And they said, Come, let us make a town, and a tower whose top will go up as high as heaven; and let us make a great name for ourselves, so that we may not be wanderers over the face of the earth.
5 And the Lord came down to see the town and the tower which the children of men were building.
6 And the Lord said, See, they are all one people and have all one language; and this is only the start of what they may do: and now it will not be possible to keep them from any purpose of theirs.
7 Come, let us go down and take away the sense of their language, so that they will not be able to make themselves clear to one another.
8 So the Lord God sent them away into every part of the earth: and they gave up building their town.
9 So it was named Babel, because there the Lord took away the sense of all languages and from there the Lord sent them away over all the face of the earth.
(BBE)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRwe6gvL-I8
zig·gu·rat
ˈziɡəˌrat/
noun
- (in ancient Mesopotamia) a rectangular stepped tower, sometimes surmounted by a temple. Ziggurats are first attested in the late 3rd millennium BC and probably inspired the Biblical story of the Tower of Babel (Gen. 11:1–9).
Years ago, Cornelius Ryan wrote a book about the Battle of the Bulge called "A Bridge Too Far" about how one portion of the Allied Army pushed too far ahead in the fighting in Germany and the Germans started a run with their tanks to cut that portion off from the rest of the forces. That ended in failure.
Nimrod's forces or some remnant of that united front forged into the area that would become Babylon, perhaps pursuing Eden which had been in that area but must have vanished with the Flood. Instead, they found the muddy wetland. apparently farther than they had gone before. A land too far and too far past the limit of God's willingness to permit what they proceeded to do.
Matt Henry:
INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS CHAPTER 11
The old distinction between the sons of God and the sons of men (professors and profane) survived the flood, and now appeared again, when men began to multiply: according to this distinction we have, in this chapter,
I. The dispersion of the sons of men at Babel, Ge 11:1-9, where we have,
1. Their presumptuous provoking design, which was to build a city and a tower, Ge 11:1-4.
2. The righteous judgment of God upon them in disappointing their design, by confounding their language, and so scattering them, Ge 11:5-9.
II. The pedigree of the sons of God down to Abraham (Ge 11:10-26), with a general account of his family, and removal out of his native country, Ge 11:27-32.
Ver. 1.
The close of the foregoing chapter tells us that by the sons of Noah, or among the sons of Noah, the nations were divided in the earth after the flood, that is, were distinguished into several tribes or colonies; and, the places having grown too strait for them, it was either appointed by Noah, or agreed upon among his sons, which way each several tribe or colony should steer its course, beginning with the countries that were next them, and designing to proceed further and further, and to remove to a greater distance from each other, as the increase of their several companies should require. Thus was the matter well settled, one hundred years after the flood, about the time of Peleg's birth; but the sons of men, it should seem, were loath to disperse into distant places; they thought the more the merrier and the safer, and therefore they contrived to keep together, and were slack to go to possess the land which the Lord God of their fathers had given them (Jos 18:3), thinking themselves wiser than either God or Noah. Now here we have,
I. The advantages which befriended their design of keeping together,
1. They were all of one language, Ge 11:1. If there were any different languages before the flood, yet Noah's only, which it is likely was the same with Adam's, was preserved through the flood, and continued after it. Now, while they all understood one another, they would be the more likely to love one another, and the more capable of helping one another, and the less inclinable to separate one from another.
2. They found a very convenient commodious place to settle in (Ge 11:2), a plain in the land of Shinar, a spacious plain, able to contain them all, and a fruitful plain, able, according as their present numbers were, to support them all, though perhaps they had not considered what room there would be for them when their numbers should be increased. Note, Inviting accommodations, for the present, often prove too strong temptations to the neglect of both duty and interest, as it respects futurity.
II. The method they took to bind themselves to one another, and to settle together in one body. Instead of coveting to enlarge their borders by a peaceful departure under the divine protection, they contrived to fortify them, and, as those that were resolved to wage war with Heaven, they put themselves into a posture of defense. Their unanimous resolution is, Let us build ourselves a city and a tower. It is observable that the first builders of cities, both in the old world (Ge 4:17), and in the new world here, were not men of the best character and reputation: tents served God's subjects to dwell in; cities were first built by those that were rebels against him and revolters from him. Observe here,
1. How they excited and encouraged one another to set about this work. They said, Go to, let us make brick (Ge 11:3), and again, (Ge 11:4), Go to, let us build ourselves a city; by mutual excitements they made one another more daring and resolute. Note, Great things may be brought to pass when the undertakers are numerous and unanimous, and stir up one another. Let us learn to provoke one another to love and to good works, as sinners stir up and encourage one another to wicked works. See Ps 122:1; Isa 2:3,5; Jer 50:5.
2. What materials they used in their building. The country, being plain, yielded neither stone nor mortar, yet this did not discourage them from their undertaking, but they made brick to serve instead of stone, and slime or pitch instead of mortar. See here,
(1.) What shift those will make that are resolute in their purposes: were we but zealously affected in a good thing, we should not stop our work so often as we do, under pretence that we want conveniences for carrying it on.
(2.) What a difference there is between men's building and God's; when men build their Babel, brick and slime are their best materials; but, when God builds his Jerusalem, he lays even the foundations of it with sapphires, and all its borders with pleasant stones, Isa 54:11-12; Re 21:19.
3. For what ends they built. Some think they intended hereby to secure themselves against the waters of another flood. God had told them indeed that he would not again drown the world; but they would trust to a tower of their own making, rather than to a promise of God's making or an ark of his appointing. If, however, they had had this in their eye, they would have chosen to build their tower upon a mountain rather than upon a plain, but three things, it seems, they aimed at in building this tower:--
(1.) It seems designed for an affront to God himself; for they would build a tower whose top might reach to heaven, which bespeaks a defiance of God, or at least a rivalry with him. They would be like the Most High, or would come as near him as they could, not in holiness but in height. They forgot their place, and, scorning to creep on the earth, resolved to climb to heaven, not by the door or ladder, but some other way.
(2.) They hoped hereby to make themselves a name; they would do something to be talked of now, and to give posterity to know that there had been such men as they in the world. Rather than die and leave no memorandum behind them, they would leave this monument of their pride, and ambition, and folly. Note,
[1.] Affectation of honor and a name among men commonly inspires with a strange ardor for great and difficult undertakings, and often betrays to that which is evil and offensive to God.
[2.] It is just with God to bury those names in the dust which are raised by sin. These Babel-builders put themselves to a great deal of foolish expense to make themselves a name; but they could not gain even this point, for we do not find in any history the name of so much as one of these Babel-builders. Philo Judaeus says, They engraved every one his name upon a brick, in perpetuam rei memoriam--as a perpetual memorial; yet neither did this serve their purpose.
(3.) They did it to prevent their dispersion: Lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth.
"It was done" (says Josephus) "in disobedience to that command (Ge 9:1), Replenish the earth."
God orders them to disperse.
"No," say they, "we will not, we will live and die together."
In order hereunto, they engage themselves and one another in this vast undertaking. That they might unite in one glorious empire, they resolve to build this city and tower, to be the metropolis of their kingdom and the centre of their unity. It is probable that the band of ambitious Nimrod was in all this. He could not content himself with the command of a particular colony, but aimed at universal monarchy, in order to which, under pretence of uniting for their common safety, he contrives to keep them in one body, that, having them all under his eye, he might not fail to have them under his power. See the daring presumption of these sinners. Here is,
[1.] A bold opposition to God:
"You shall be scattered," says God.
"But we will not," say they.
Woe unto him that thus strives with his maker.
[2.] A bold competition with God. It is God's prerogative to be universal monarch, Lord of all, and King of kings; the man that aims at it offers to step into the throne of God, who will not give his glory to another.
Recall we mentioned Nimrod seems to have melded the old gods with the goddess system so both could be worshiped and people could be unified. That new religion now finds a home in a tower with a temple on top. The purpose was worship, but also a study of the heavens, where the gods might reside. Hence astrology began around this time, too. One god/goddess from that time rings very familiar to us today:
Nanna/Suen/Sin (god)
Mesopotamian moon god. He was called Nanna in Sumerian, and Su'en or Sin in Akkadian.
Functions
.
The ziggurat TT , or temple tower, of Nanna at Ur. It was built by king Ur-Namma of Ur (r. about 2112-2095 BCE), the founder of the Ur III dynasty. The monumental temple tower is built of solid bricks. © Penn Museum.
The primary symbol of the moon god was as a bull, the result of the horizontal crescent of the waxing moon appearing similar to the horns of that animal. This symbolism led to a consideration of the moon god as a cowherd, which is celebrated most clearly in the composition The Herds of Nanna (ETCSL 4.13.06), the longest section of which enumerates the cattle in Nanna's herd.
The moon god was the tutelary deity of the city of Ur.
(A little further on the Bible tells us that Abram came from Ur. That "sin"
was chosen as the name for all evil doings says a lot about the nature of worship for this god. W)
His reach and importance, however, was far greater than just a city god, the moon god is clearly one of the most important deities in the wider pantheon of Mesopotamia. In the Early Dynastic god lists, such as Fara SF 1, the moon god appears immediately after the four leading gods An, Enlil, Inana and Enki (Klein 2001: 290, and this important, albeit slightly junior position, is confirmed in the text Nanna-Suen's Journey to Nippur (ETCSL 1.5.1: 18), when Nanna brings the "first fruit offerings" to Enlil, the head of the early Mesopotamian pantheon (Black et al. 2004: 147)An association with fertility may come from the moon god's connection to cattle, and also, perhaps, from the clear link to the menstrual cycle, roughly similar to the timing of the moon's transformations. The connection with fertility is demonstrated in the Old Babylonian (early second-millennium) birth incantations (Krebernik 1993-98b: 367; Veldhuis 1991). The magical-medical text A Cow of Sin relates the story of the moon god's beautiful and pregnant cow, Geme-Sin. The birthing-pains of Geme-Sin are eased by Sin, and the incantation ends with a 'supplication: "may this woman give birth as easily as Geme-Sin" suggesting this text's role in human child-birth (Veldhuis 1991: 1).
Other literature makes much of the moon as an astronomical feature. The deity is referred to in terms characteristic of the celestial body, e.g., radiant, shining, and much is made of the moon's path and cycle, which were also keenly observed for omens of the future, for example in the first-millennium series šumma Sin ina tāmartišu, "If the moon at its appearance" (Hunger and Pingree 1999: 21 ff.).
The Akkadian literature evokes some of the other functions of the moon god. A prayer to Su'en details his role in divination (Foster 2005: 758-9). No doubt this divinatory role was also connected to the moon god's ability to illuminate darkness (Foster 2005: 760-1). Both the moon god and the sun god are praised together in a further text in which they are associated with issuing laws and verdicts, the determination of destinies, and the announcements of omens (Foster 2005: 762). This judicial role was already obvious in the text of the Early Dynastic 'Stele of the Vultures', where oaths are taken in the presence of Su'en, and in his epithet "diviner of fates", which is used across the Near East (Krebernik 1993-98b: 367).
The earliest attestation of this name dates back to the very beginning of written documentations. In personal names the moon god is attested from the Late Uruk period until the very end of the cuneiform tradition. Not only is he frequently attested in personal names, a testimony to personal piety, he is also frequently invoked in royal names from the earlier to the late periods, for example: Naram-Sin (Old Akkadian); Amar-Su'en, Šu-Sin, Ibbi-Sin (all Ur III) Sin-iddinam (Old Babylonian), Sennacherib (Akkadian: Sin-ahhe-eruba - from the Neo Assyrian period) (Cohen 1996: 9; Krebernik 1993-98b: 360; Hall 1985: 56-91).
The moon god is most frequently represented by his symbol, the crescent moon (Sumerian u4-sakar, Akkadian u/ašqāru). This iconography is already known form Early Dynastic seals, and continues throughout Mesopotamian history and across the Ancient Near East. The crescent shape had an impact on other symbols which came to be associated with Nanna/Suen, primarily the moon god's association with the bull (Krebernik 1993-98b: 360). Additionally, Nanna/Su'en is often attested in connection with a boat. Other iconographic symbols include a rather enigmatic tripod, and it is now thought that many of the motifs once thought to be solely associated with the sun god - such as rays, gates and a god-figure rising between mountains, might now also be considered iconographic characteristics of the moon god. Such similarities should not be surprising given that the moon provided the light of the night-time, as the sun did for the day (Krebernik 1993-98b: 374-7).
This matters to us for two reasons.
First, our current suggestion that the gods and goddesses were combined.
The Moon Goddess is an important deity in many cultures around the world where they form a central role in mythology.
The moon is associated with the divine feminine as in many tribal societies the feminine cycles were linked to the phases of the moon.
Not all the lunar deities were female Chandra is the God of the moon in Hinduism and Mani the Germanic moon gods are to examples of this.
The Moon was important in ancient calendars, helping people to measure time and to determine when the best time was for planting and harvesting crops. This fertility aspect of the lunar Goddess is reflected in large numbers of the entries below.
The moon and the stars were also a way that the ancient people navigated the land and seas.
Many of the lunar Goddesses like Hecate and Cerridwen, are also associated with magic and the intuitive nature of women.
The lunar deities are also very important archetypes in the modern pagan movement and Wicca.
(Note: This being a new age wiccan site, I won't include a link and will point out she missed the most obvious male moon deity. I include an interesting partial list of moon goddesses. W)
Selene (Greek) - A mother Goddess linked to the full moon. She is widely worshipped by Pagans today.
Sina (Polynesian) - This moon Goddess was the sister of the sun God Maui. She was sometimes called Ina.
Teczistecatl (Aztec) - A Goddess of sex, symbolised by the four phases of the moon: dark, waxing, full, and waning.
Trivia (Roman) - She is the equivalent Goddess to Selene in Roman mythology.
Xochhiquetzal (Aztec) - This magical moon Goddess was the deity of flowers, spring, sex, love, and marriage. She was the wife of storm God Tlaloc. She is also the patroness of artisans, prostitutes, pregnant women and birth.
The moon seems to be the "hinge" of the door shutting and opening on goddess worship. When we see a moon god men seem to have taken over in the hunting tradition and women seem to have lost their voice in the culture. When the moon is a goddess, the area has become more urban, less masculine dominated, more agrarian, women seem to have a stronger usually sexual role in the society.
The second reason this strikes us is this:
The second reason this strikes us is this:
The crescent moon and star is an internationally-recognized symbol of Islam. The symbol is featured on the flags of several Muslim countries, and is even part of the official emblem for theInternational Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies. The Christians have the cross, the Jews have the star of David, and the Muslims have the crescent moon, right?
Pre-Islamic Symbol
The crescent moon and star symbol actually pre-dates Islam by several thousand years. Information on the origins of the symbol are difficult to confirm, but most sources agree that these ancient celestial symbols were in use by the peoples of Central Asia and Siberia in their worship of sun, moon, and sky gods. There are also reports that the crescent moon and star were used to represent the Carthaginian goddess Tanit or the Greek goddess Diana.
Robert Morley reports Allah as a mood god while Islam sources claim the moon symbol came about on the flag through the Ottoman empire. Either way, that crescent shape that was fixed in paganism now has a home in Islam.
Ziggurats themselves have an interesting history most of it known for Herodotus' history:
According to Herodotus, at the top of each ziggurat was a shrine, although none of these shrines have survived.[1] One practical function of the ziggurats was a high place on which the priests could escape rising water that annually inundated lowlands and occasionally flooded for hundreds of miles, for example the 1967 flood.[5] Another practical function of the ziggurat was for security. Since the shrine was accessible only by way of three stairways,[6] a small number of guards could prevent non-priests from spying on the rituals at the shrine on top of the ziggurat, such as initiation rituals such as the Eleusinian mysteries, cooking of sacrificial food and burning of carcasses of sacrificial animals. Each ziggurat was part of a temple complex that included a courtyard, storage rooms, bathrooms, and living quarters, around which a city was built.
According to http://www.biblearchaeology.org/post/2008/05/Is-there-Archaeological-Evidence-for-the-Tower-of-Babel.aspx ziggurats were designed as homes away from home for the gods or the city god. They were set up with food and resting places for a visiting god as well as access to various other human amenities with the top level reserved for viewing the heavens and providing a gateway to heaven. Research proves the building materials used were exactly as described in 11;3. These materials were used for either government or religious buildings which were grouped together in Mesopotamian cities. Again a hint at the mixture of government and religion under the god-king pattern. Since the Osirus myth suggested Nimrod died and came to visit his wife and impregnate her, this also ushers in the notion of temple prostitutes and Vestal Virgins keeping themselves pure for the gods. C.J. Gadd suggested "the distinction between city and temple becomes dim" pointing out that the area built as Babel may well have been the public and temple building with much more temporary dwelling around the structure. this was only made possible by the centralization of power. The god-king and his military force gave the temple complete rights in land ownership and power over the people who lived in the city area.
The article cites Jacobsen as noting urbanization went hand-in-hand with the rise of "humanized" gods. Genesis implies it in the first urbanization prior to the Flood and then underscores it with Nimrod.
And with it came the building of statues to those humanized gods.
"The development in Mesopotamian religion that took place with the development of urbanization was that men began to envision their gods in conformity with the image of man. Man was no longer attempting to be like God, but, more insidiously, was trying to bring deity down to the level of man."
John H. Walton, author of the above article who also concludes: "This goes beyond mere idolatry: it degrades the very nature of God."
One other thing may have been associated with these pyramids as it was with the Aztec step pyramids in Mesoamerica:
Sacrifice was a common theme in Mesoamerican cultures. In the Aztec "Legend of the Five Suns", all the gods sacrificed themselves so that mankind could live. Some years after the Spanish conquest of Mexico, a body of Franciscans confronted the remaining Aztec priesthood and demanded, under threat of death, that they desist from this traditional practice. The Aztec priests defended themselves as follows:
What the Aztec priests were referring to was a central Mesoamerican belief: that a great, continuing sacrifice of the gods sustains the Universe. Everything on earth is tonacayotl - "spiritual flesh-hood". All things—earth, crops, moon, stars and people—springs from the severed or buried bodies, fingers, blood or the heads of the sacrificed gods. Humanity itself is macehualli, "those deserved and brought back to life through penance".[9] A strong sense of indebtedness was connected with this worldview. Indeed, nextlahualli (debt-payment) was a commonly used metaphor for human sacrifice, and, as Bernardino de Sahagún reported, it was said that the victim was someone who "gave his service".
Human sacrifice was in this sense the highest level of an entire panoply of offerings through which the Aztecs sought to repay their debt to the gods. Both Sahagún and Toribio de Benavente (also called "Motolinía") observed that the Aztecs gladly parted with everything: burying, smashing, sinking, slaying vast quantities of quail, rabbits, dogs, feathers, flowers, insects, beans, grains, paper, rubber and treasures as sacrifices. Even the "stage" for human sacrifice, the massive temple-pyramids, was an offering mound: crammed with treasures, grains, soil and human and animal sacrifices that were buried as gifts to the deities. Adorned with the land's finest art, treasure and victims, these temples became buried offerings under new structures every half a century.
We don't know that human sacrifice was made on the Tower of Babel. but that would also have been the ultimate destruction of the image of God: man. And that would have pleased the serpent as much as it would have angered God.
Many commentaries, like Henry's, see the resistance to God's command to scatter as the cause for His anger, but the nature of the temple itself seems a logical reason. Some blend of both may have played a roles, though we have to recall the very first Commandment is "You shall have no other gods before me" and the second, "You shall make no idols. No craven image."
In The Origin of Consciousness in The Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, Julian Jaynes who was listed with an English degree when I first read the book twenty years ago, a degree which influenced his theory since he noted the story telling style vastly differed between the Iliad, more dreamy with the gods and goddesses everywhere, and the Odyssey, with Ulysses always the logical man fighting the influence of gods and men influenced by them, but is now listed as a psychologist, wrote a book on the following premise:
In The Origin of Consciousness in The Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind, Julian Jaynes who was listed with an English degree when I first read the book twenty years ago, a degree which influenced his theory since he noted the story telling style vastly differed between the Iliad, more dreamy with the gods and goddesses everywhere, and the Odyssey, with Ulysses always the logical man fighting the influence of gods and men influenced by them, but is now listed as a psychologist, wrote a book on the following premise:
At the heart of this book is the revolutionary idea that human consciousness did not begin far back in animal evolution but is a learned process brought into being out of an earlier hallucinatory mentality by cataclysm and catastrophe only 3000 years ago and still developing. The implications of this new scientific paradigm extend into virtually every aspect of our psychology, our history and culture, our religion - and indeed, our future. In the words of one reviewer, it is "a humbling text, the kind that reminds most of us who make our livings through thinking, how much thinking there is left to do."
* * *
Presents a theory of the bicameral mind which holds that ancient peoples could not "think" as we do today and were therefore "unconscious," a result of the domination of the right hemisphere; only catastrophe forced mankind to "learn" consciousness, a product of human history and culture and one that issues from the brain's left hemisphere. Three forms of human awareness, the bicameral or god-run man; the modern or problem-solving man; and contemporary forms of throwbacks to bicamerality (e.g., religious frenzy, hypnotism, and schizophrenia) are examined in terms of the physiology of the brain and how it applies to human psychology, culture, and history.
* * *
— excerpt from the Introduction to The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind
Jaynes notes a marked change in literature, in the recorded human view of gods, once actively talking to humanity, they suddenly vanish into humanized forms that never seem to ha ve uch to do with humanity except by disasters and monsters created for the gods and goddesses to get their way. . They become a thing of the past, recalled vaguely. Worshiped because of coincidence: someone prays to a specific god for something to happen. It does and so the god has power for a time.
For his disaster, Jaynes even suggested an Atlantis scenario for Crete nd nearby civilizations due to the Thera explosion:
For his disaster, Jaynes even suggested an Atlantis scenario for Crete nd nearby civilizations due to the Thera explosion:
The Minoan eruption of Thera, also referred to as the Thera eruption or Santorini eruption, was a major catastrophic volcaniceruption with a Volcanic Explosivity Index (VEI) of 6 or 7 and a dense-rock equivalent (DRE) of 60 km3 (14 cu mi),[1][2] Dated to the mid-second millennium BCE,[3] the eruption was one of the largest volcanic events on Earth in recorded history.[4][5][6] It devastated the island of Thera (now called Santorini), including the Minoan settlement at Akrotiri and communities and agricultural areas on nearby islands and the coast of Crete with a related earthquake or tsunami.
There are no clear ancient records of the eruption, which may have inspired certain Greek myths,[7] caused turmoil in Egypt[8][9] and be alluded to in a Chinese chronicle.
Or, if you're of a mind may have resulted in a monumental localized flooding. But about jaynes theory:
Myth: The Thera explosion and resulting tsunamis around 1600 B.C. could not have caused the mass migrations and social disruption in the Mediterranean Jaynes describes.
Fact: Recent investigations have revealed that the Thera explosion and resulting tsunamis had a much more devastating impact on the Mediterranean than was previously known, wiping out coastal communities and causing a period of widespread unrest. The Thera explosion is now believed to be ten times more powerful than the Krakatoa eruption in 1883, which killed 36,000 in Indonesia from the initial eruption and resulting tsunamis. "The destructive force was incomprehensible. ... A search turns up Theran ash 500 miles away in the Black Sea. ... We really are talking about the largest volcanic event in human history in Europe" ("Sinking Atlantis," PBS Home Video, 2008).
Sea floor deposits found inland and high above sea level along with building damage patterns suggest a massive tsunami triggered by the Thera explosion hit Crete and nearly wiped out the coastal Minoan civilization. The initial wave that hit Crete was at least thirty miles wide and followed by several other waves at intervals of 30–45 minutes. See "Sinking Atlantis" (Secrets of the Dead Series), PBS Home Video, 2008.
The series of tsunamis that hit Sumatra, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and other countries in December 2004 provide a modern example of the devastating impact of large tsunamis. The tsunamis, triggered by a magnitude 9.1 earthquake in the Indian Ocean, killed more than 225,000 people in 11 countries. Coastal communities were hit with waves up to 100 feet high. It is believed the tsunami following the Thera explosion was of a similar magnitude.
A related misconception is that Jaynes argues the Thera explosion somehow "caused" the emergence of consciousness. Jaynes argues the shift to consciousness was the result of a number of factors including complex metaphorical language and writing. The mass migrations and social disruption following the Thera explosion may have contributed to the process in the Mediterranean. Different cultures developed consciousness at different times in other parts of the world.
Having read the book, I can say Jaynes heavily emphasizes the explosion as the point of emergence. But the point he makes is based on the change in language, suggesting language change alters consciousness whereas consciousness supposedly alters language in current reasoning.
All if this seems so much gibberish until we deduce what Jaynes actually may have detected was proof of Babel. We;ve seen major traumas throughout history and certainly ones effected mankind BEFORE Thera. But if God blew up Thera to destroy the Tower and the nearby civilizations even as He changed language, then there would be a positive association between the two events and an unsaved mind would logically deduce the one event caused the other, Eruption=language change, whereas they were merely both events that occurred at the same time related by God's wrath. Jaynes may well have found the only kind of evidence of the change that can be found and, since 1976 and the publication of the book, that evidence has laid open to the public wrapped in misinterpretation.
At the least, it attests to a much later change in character of language than was and has been noted as fact.
From here, we go to a summation, then the post-law phase of our Fallen Flesh.
(Note: since an earlier blog, I have changed my idea concerning the origin of the nephilim and am going back to edit that posting. Then I am working on getting my blog Your True Life Now translated into several other languages after I reedit. I will restart this blog in four weeks, Thnaks for reading and hope you return, W)
All if this seems so much gibberish until we deduce what Jaynes actually may have detected was proof of Babel. We;ve seen major traumas throughout history and certainly ones effected mankind BEFORE Thera. But if God blew up Thera to destroy the Tower and the nearby civilizations even as He changed language, then there would be a positive association between the two events and an unsaved mind would logically deduce the one event caused the other, Eruption=language change, whereas they were merely both events that occurred at the same time related by God's wrath. Jaynes may well have found the only kind of evidence of the change that can be found and, since 1976 and the publication of the book, that evidence has laid open to the public wrapped in misinterpretation.
At the least, it attests to a much later change in character of language than was and has been noted as fact.
From here, we go to a summation, then the post-law phase of our Fallen Flesh.
(Note: since an earlier blog, I have changed my idea concerning the origin of the nephilim and am going back to edit that posting. Then I am working on getting my blog Your True Life Now translated into several other languages after I reedit. I will restart this blog in four weeks, Thnaks for reading and hope you return, W)
No comments:
Post a Comment