Re: Reading Genesis literally

Hello, Dick!

I have sometimes wondered if there is also a message in here about the
development (or enhancement) of polytheism. Could it be that, at some distant time
in the past, the Sumerians were essentially monotheists of some sort -- maybe
not overtly, but in their hearts there apprehended that there is a God who is
behind everything -- but then each community eventually developed its own
epithet to describe this one God? Perhaps one group worshipped God according to
the epithet "Anu", emphasizing his heavenliness, while another worshipped the
same God according to the epithet "Ea", emphasizing his wisdom and his creation
of mankind. Perhaps each community, in vying for pre-eminence, eventually
forgot that "Anu" and "Ea" had originally been references that apprehend the
same being. In that sense, their speech became _confused_, and they divided from
one another, stopped cooperating, and began trying to make their temples
higher than that of their neighbors. This scattered them so that they could not
achieve what they _would_ have achieved had they stayed united in the worship
of one God. Hence, the Sumerians failed, but the Semitic peoples continued
following the truth.

Do you see any possible merit to this idea?

Phil Metzger

In a message dated 4/30/2006 10:56:40 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
dickfischer@verizon.net writes:
One of the biggest problems I see is understanding the context, which isn’t
always easy. I can say to you, “I’m sitting out in the cold.” You can take
that literally. But if you see me scantily clad out doors in sub-zero
temperature, what I meant by that will be taken differently then if I’m with you in a
circle of knowledgeable people while you’re holding a conversation that’s
beyond my comprehension.
 And that’s the difficulty with Genesis. Apologists down through the
centuries had no awareness of the Mesopotamian background. Genesis 11:1 is a prime
example.
 Genesis 11:1: "And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech."
 It is not difficult to see how Bible interpreters have been as baffled as
the tower builders. The true confusion of tongues, surpassing the incident at
Babel, is the translation of Hebrew into English. The Hebrew, ‘erets is
translated "earth," although in the next verse the same word is rendered as the
"land" of Shinar.
 If erets is translate “land” and the Hebrew saphah is translated literally
as “lip,” rather than the broader word “language,” the text would read as
follows: “And the whole land was of one lip and one speech.”
 Since the Sumerians and Accadians spoke unrelated languages, and the
Accadian language is the precursor to Hebrew, then at least two languages were spoken
in the region of Shinar at the same time. So it is unlikely the writer of
Genesis wanted to convey that everyone spoke a common language. Plainly, they
did not.
 After the flood, the mud brick platforms constructed in the Mesopotamian
cities began to grow and take on religious connotations. The ziggurats became
the dwelling places of the gods and temples were constructed as places of
worship.
 It appears the builders at Babylon were caught up in a ziggurat building
competition with their neighbors. To show their faith and allegiance to their
one true God they tried to outbuild the other cities. Not impressed with having
a mound of mudbricks a few cubits higher than the one dedicated to the
moon-god Nanna, God confused their speech. And the Semites in Babylon abruptly
terminated construction and scattered, but their basic language was unaltered.
 Genesis 11:1 refers to the primary topic of conversation of the day which
was about building mud brick platforms, adorning them with temples of worship,
and devoting them to the various gods. The people in the land were all talking
about the same thing, they were of “one lip.”
Dick Fischer
Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
http://www.genesisproclaimed.org/
Received on Tue May 2 23:52:56 2006