Tower of Babel???

[Mullenite]

Jared and his "Buds" attempted to build the Tower of Babel.

Question for all...Think there was a possibility that they saw the

City of Enoch above the earth for some time, until she was translated and taken?

[taletotell]

Chances are pretty slim. The city itself was probably left empty when Enoch's people went, and they probably were no more visible going up than any angel has been coming down.

The tower of Babel was a temple, such as which were common in that time. You build a high zigurat (pyramid) to act as your mountain of the Lord and on top build a room to be your celestial room. By building this temple they thought they would get to heaven, regardless of their behavior. For most it was a selfish thing to glorify men in the eyes of their neighbors since theirs would be the highest and therefore best temple. Because they were apostatizing God cursed them.

For some, such as Jared and his family and followers it was likely that it was intended to be a temple for the true purpose, so God spared them the curse.

[Lisa-marie]

What is the tower of Babel?

[pam]

The Tower of Babel was a tower that the descendents of Noah built. They thought it would get them to heaven. They were punished because they were trying to get to heaven by worldly means.

[beefche]

See Genesis 11 in the Old Testament.

[Lisa-marie]

Ok now I know what your talking about... never knew the name of it before

[bert10]

Babel also stands for confusion...for God confounded their language by the removal of the Holy Ghost from them. Now without the Holy Ghost they could not comprehend each other and had to split up in groups. They not only wanted the tower to reach into heaven...they meant to assault heaven by force. Satan was in charge of this foolishness.

In order to build this tower...Government was founded,,,and force and even slavery came to remove the liberty of the people. Also from Babylon came other things such as Writing using words. As before the books of God were all in Glyph and required men who were inspired to read them. After Babylon false ministers became the rule. And they used religion to bind men further into error. Now everyone who could read whether they were inspired of GOD or not...could go about and preach what the scriptures meant according to their own wisdom and knowledge.

Many of the laws of the Code of Hammurabi were adopted by the Priests of Aaron and put in the bible almost word for word. Many of the things we have today came from Babylon. And Babylon shall be destroyed by GOD and we shall have a society built on Righteousness instead of on wickedness.

bert10

What is the tower of Babel?

[Wingnut]

Just wondering if everyone realizes that this thread is over 2.5 years old, the OP has been banned, and the very first reply to it ever was yesterday?

[pam]

Yes I realized that. But I wasn't going to close it down when we had someone non lds continuing the question. Normally I would have. It's not hurting anything.

[Lisa-marie]

Just wondering if everyone realizes that this thread is over 2.5 years old, the OP has been banned, and the very first reply to it ever was yesterday?

No I hadn't noticed that... I guess I should thank you for keeping it open for people like me asking questions so thanks :)

[taletotell]

Bert 10, you are saying a lot considering what is available in canon. What are your sources?

[bert10]

You speak as a Christian. When did God stop people from going past the canon. The thing is what I say is not authoritative until the person receives a testimony of it. Until then because it is not coming from a General authority....you have the leisure to consider it only as information.

As for where I am getting this stuff...the Lord ensures that those who ask, seek and knock receive it one way or another. Sometimes it can be by the still small voice, burning bosom or by having our path crossed by what Isaiah used to call "wayfaring men" There are not many around but God somehow arranges things to happen that will give us answers...and then we have to ponder them until they be either true or false. That is the way I go.

In the end though the source of all things is either light or darkness. And when we are not sure we can judge by the fruits of a thing. And then we can can know for ourselves.

Yet a lot of stuff what I say is backed up by the bible or by the BOM or by some of the so called lost books of the bible even by the books of Enoch and so on.

bert10

[Casper]

I have always been interested in the story of the tower of babel, it has always heard that they were wicked people, and were trying to build their way to heave by evil means; and also that it was not possible for them to build a tower “whose top [may reach] unto heaven”(Gen 11:4)

Yet what I read in the scriptures to me say something very different.

The people were one and they wanted to stay as one a united people, with one language. (Gen 11:1,4)

The Lord in modern revelation has given a parable “I say unto you, be one; and if ye are not one ye are not mine”. (D&C 38:27)

And most interesting to me is that going by the scriptures, not only was it possible but they would have built a tower whose top would have reached to heaven

(Gen 11:6) says “…and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do”.

Well they had imagined to build the tower and had started to build it so that says to me, they would have done it, had the language not been confounded by the Lord.

The scriptures do not tell us anything about the laws of the people the economic systems that were in place at the time, nothing about slaves sorcery or even any type of wickedness, or much about what the people were like, however we do know that the Lord saw good reason to confound them and prevent the building of the tower for whatever reason he did.

[taletotell]

Casper speaks objectively, considering the available information and thus is reasonable is his assumptions.

I can't say the same for Bert10.

God will provide information for those who seek, but he seems to provide mostly on an as needed basis. Even the mighty men of God have been known to retract information from time to time, and theirs was far more pertinent to the needs of living. Consider much of what is in the book Mormon Doctrine. A lot of what Bruce R. McConkie wrote he later retracted though at the time he had been sure it was revelation.

That said, the Holy Ghost being removed simply shows their apostasy. The confounding of their language might have been separate altogether. Satan in charge? More like he worked as he always does, putting evil into mens hearts through temptation and they put their own heads in the noose.

As for slavery, if they had slaves and God had not commanded them not to then he would not have expected them not to or punished them for it. Abraham's bondsmen were slaves and there was no sin in that because they had not received this commandment yet.

Whether men of God were required to read the available reading material is immaterial, as we don't know when men invented their own writing or if reading and writing were necessary to the building of their temple. Ancient peoples exercised their memories in such a way to memorize volumes of material perfectly, as can be seen in the many poets who memorized the works of Homer or the tale of Beowulf when literacy was rare.

I still feel the men of Babel where building a temple when they began and became corrupted before it was finished, so instead of letting them have it God confounded them. From there much is lost to scripture because God didn't feel it needed to reach us.

What is outside canon might well be the local farmer's interpretation that he told a passing poet who made it larger than life and repeated at the next town.

Edited January 11, 2011 by taletotell
Edited for grammar

[Still_Small_Voice]

Abraham's bondsmen were slaves and there was no sin in that because they had not received this commandment yet.

Maybe Abraham's servants were treated very well and also given material possessions. Perhaps this is the reason he did not sin in having these servants.

[bert10]

Where are you getting this? Abraham lived the law of Consecration even though He paid Melchizedek only a tithing of what He had. Living the law of consecration does not preclude having servants for there need to be order in any society. Abraham was taught by the Patriarchs. Lot wanted to have possession apart from Abraham and this began to cause friction between those loyal to Lot and those loyal to Abraham. And so there came a parting of the ways between Abraham and Lot his Nephew...whom Abraham had come to regard as his son and heir. God had other plans though. He would give Abraham and actual son.

The events will show that when Lot separated from Abraham...He also lost the blessing and guidance from God through Abraham.

We can see that Lot received his inheritance and lived separately from Abraham. Also Lot chose what he thought was the best for him. However, events later proved that Lot did not choose well and Lost his wealth and all that remained of his family ....only two daughters. And through Lot and his daughters...two people that would later became bitter enemies to Israel.

bert10

[taletotell]

Yes, thanks for the short review of Abraham's life. Abraham was also a powerful man politically, a king in Cannan. There was very little monetary exchange in his time and wealth measured in servants and soldiers. His servants would not have been paid in money, but would be rewarded instead by being protected and provided for. This is the system we now call slavery, but was the system for survival at the time. Freedom would have had to been granted and would have included an aid to one's survival such as sheep or goats if the master was pleased and would be with nothing if the master was angry, virtually ensuring death since survival depended on the cooperation of the group. Only an act of God such as that provided to Hagar and Ishmael would have ensured the survival of one thrown out of clan with nothing.

"Servants" were largely slaves and there is no problem with that. That is the point I was making. If Bable was built by slaves that does not contribute to its wickedness.

A lot of what you say appears to be a basic understanding of the scriptures and lessons, with your personal philosophies coloring it. I suggest that you might be wrong and should stick to using scriptural quotes and historical data to paint a possible picture of how it was instead of saying you know of assurity it was how you say.

[bytor2112]

God will provide information for those who seek, but he seems to provide mostly on an as needed basis. Even the mighty men of God have been known to retract information from time to time, and theirs was far more pertinent to the needs of living. Consider much of what is in the book Mormon Doctrine. A lot of what Bruce R. McConkie wrote he later retracted though at the time he had been sure it was revelation.

This is simply false. The first edition of Mormon Doctrine was later edited and some "softening of the language: occurred and some topics such as playing with face cards were removed as they didn't truly pertain to LDS Doctrine.

I do not know why people believe and perpetuate this notion....it is simply untrue.

[taletotell]

I refer to his later disavowed comments on race. Not to mention his attacks on the Catholic Church which have since been corrected by more recent authorities.

McConkie even said he regretted having published it and the whole book was published against the wishes of the prophet, President McKay.

[taletotell]

From Pres McKay’s diary, “It was agreed that the necessary corrections are so numerous that to republish a corrected edition of the book would be such an extensive repudiation of the original as to destroy the credit of the author; that the republication of the book should be forbidden and that the book should be repudiated in such a way as to save the career of the author as one of the General Authorities of the Church.”

[Suzie]

I do not know why people believe and perpetuate this notion....it is simply untrue.

What notion is that? I'm kind of confused as what is the issue you guys are talking about.

[bytor2112]

I refer to his later disavowed comments on race. Not to mention his attacks on the Catholic Church which have since been corrected by more recent authorities.

McConkie even said he regretted having published it and the whole book was published against the wishes of the prophet, President McKay.

Wrong again. He DID say "forget" whatever he or other authorities said regarding blacks and the Priesthood because of new light. He wrote very eoquently regarding the revelation.....as HE was there and involved.

The 2nd Edition of MD was done with the approval of the First Presidency and in conjunction with Spencer Kimball. President McKay never asked Elder McConkie, (then a Seventy) to NOT write MD. Imagine for a moment that a Seventy went against the President of the church.....Do you really think he would be called as an Apostle later???? If you knew anything about Bruce McConkie, he would never do anything such as you suggest.

Were there some revisions? Yep. Catholic references removed? Yep. Catholic references corrected by more recent GA's? Nope.

Much of McConkie's work is still found in the modern rendering of the Standard works....chapter summaries, Bible Dictionary, Institute and other teaching manuals. Source: MD, Doctrinal New Testament Commentary, The Messiah Series, A new Witness of the Articles Of Faith.

No doubt MD caused a stir because it wasn't named....:" A Handy reference guide to LDS beliefs". The authorative title did cause a stir and that sharp tone toward certain practices rubbed some church members the wrong way.

THe revisions did not include doctrinal changes...just softened tones and removal of some topics that really didn't fit.

Edited January 13, 2011 by bytor2112

[bytor2112]

Preacher of Righteousness sums up Elder McConkiess life quite well. I know that this is way off topic and I am sure taletotell isn't disrespecting Elder McConkie, but the communication of facts is important. Edited January 13, 2011 by bytor2112

[pam]

Since we have so many non members that have joined us, could we start typing out names instead of acronyms or initials so others that may not be members of the church know what we are talking about?

[Just_A_Guy]

Since we have so many non members that have joined us, could we start typing out names instead of acronyms or initials so others that may not be members of the church know what we are talking about?

O.K.