> General Discussions

Is the tower of Babel symbolic of the religious church world?

(1/6) > >>

Joey Porter:
This is something I've been thinking about lately.  I am curious for the input of others; if you see the same thing.

We're probably all familiar with the story, but I'll post the scripture anyway:

Genesis 11
 1 Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. 2 As men moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there.
 3 They said to each other, "Come, let's make bricks and bake them thoroughly." They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 4 Then they said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves and not be scattered over the face of the whole earth."

 5 But the LORD came down to see the city and the tower that the men 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. 7 Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other."

 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 —because there the LORD confused the language of the whole world. From there the LORD scattered them over the face of the whole earth.

To me, that seems to be a prophecy of the church.  The church seems to be trying to make a name for itself, building a figurative "tower" that reaches to heaven - a great big work of the flesh, with its great big fancy church buildings.

But God has confused its languages.  That's why baptists don't see what methodists see, pre-tribbers don't see what post-tribbers see, eternal securists don't see what conditional securists see, Protestant/Catholic, Calvinist/Armenian, etc etc etc...The ''languages'' of the church world are all ''confused'' so that each denomination can't understand the other, even though they all use the same book!

Anyone agree?

I'm sure there is also all sorts of other spiritual symbolism in that story, such as the text saying "They used brick instead of stone."  Anyone know what that might be trying to tell us?

rrammfcitktturjsp:
  I would tend to agree with this.  Yes, I believe it is.  Thanks for postiing this topic.  THis should generate a lot of interesting responses.

  Sincerely,



  Anne C. McGuire

TimothyVI:
Hi Joey,

This last sentence in your post is very interesting to me.
"I'm sure there is also all sorts of other spiritual symbolism in that story, such as the text saying "They used brick instead of stone."  Anyone know what that might be trying to tell us?"

God is often referred to as a rock or stone. Could it be saying that the foundation of the church doctrine is built on a man made brick instead of the rock that is God?

Tim

Joey Porter:
Thanks for the replies. 

Timothy, I believe that you may be correct.  I was thinking along the same lines.  Bricks of course, are from the earth, just like Adam.  Perhaps building with bricks symbolizes works of the flesh.  And of course, Christ is the "Stone that the builders have rejected."

gmik:
Do you think this whole story a parable?  I find this an interesting subject. But I don't have any insights.

gena

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page