The Date of the Tower of Babel and Some Theological Implications by Paul Seely.
Overall, it was a fun and stimulating read, especially since it veered off into areas that while outside my familiarity or expertise, are nevertheless interesting subject matters (such as Creationism and the Natural Sciences). I could have done without Seely’s repeated tendentious impulse to remain faithful to the historical interpretation of the church,
which is nothing more than an appeal to authority—a logical fallacy that should not appear in a critical, scientific analysis. But I did very much appreciate both the archaeological examination of the Tower of Babel according to narrative evidence as well as the discussion of accommodation of scriptural texts to the concepts, world-views, and thought-forms of their days. Apparently, Creationists are want to approach biblical texts as if they were trying to teach astronomy or some such anachronism and I appreciate Seely setting the matter straight.
Unfortunately, the end was about as ironic and question-begging as it could get. Consider his own analysis of the situation:
One cannot date the tower of Babel early enough to fit all of the archaeological and anthropological data without implicitly espousing a methodology which favors bare possibility over probability; and such a methodology is antithetical to serious scholarship.
ibid, p. 28
And yet Seely’s way of dealing with the contradiction between the archaeological evidence and the biblical narrative is to propose a philosophy that could possibly explain the situation without giving us any historical or archaeological evidence to think there is a probability of his conclusion. Behold his summary statement:
In summary, in order to avoid obstacles to communication which might become stumbling blocks, and to respect the divine decision to delegate to humankind the responsibility for the discovery of natural knowledge, Scripture is accommodated in Gen 11:1-9 [the Babel narrative]…to the limited geographical and anthropological knowledge available at the time.
ibid, p. 38
Exactly what time
is Seely referring to? To what context is the tower of babel narrative being accommodated? Exactly what is the anthropological conception of the original hearers
of the Tower of Babel narrative and exactly who are they? Seely makes no mention of any of this in the entire essay. We are given no evidence and no reason whatsoever to believe that the original authors or hearers in whatever unmentioned historical period and geographical location believed all languages originated from a mother tongue in Babylon. The bare possibility of accommodation to such a context is all we are given. His essay is thus self-refuting, claiming to represent serious scholarship while utilizing the very method he says is antithetical to it.
Last year, I purchased an absolutely incredible audio book, The Bible Experience: Old Testament. And I say this as one who abhors audio bibles generally and the NIV specifically (The Bible Experience is based on the TNIV). That is not to say there aren’t problems. But I was able to listen through 1 and 2 Samuel, Genesis, and Exodus without any serious hiccups. In Leviticus, however, I couldn’t help laughing at a ridiculously anachronistic absurdity…
The book starts out cool enough. As YHWH speaks to Moses in the Tabernacle about Levitical rites and regulations, we are greeted with the sound of knives being drawn, animals slaughtered, blood splashed, fat and flesh burning… You can almost smell the aroma of sizzling meat. The commands come alive viscerally. But as we move away from sacrificial regulations, an ambience of meditative monastic chant echoes across the backdrop. It was so obviously out of place that I almost wonder if such juxtaposition was intended to convey something. And if so, what? Moses was the first monk? Latin preceded Hebrew? Catholics hide in holy places? Goat-hair curtains and animal hide have cathedral-like acoustics? The Pope is Jewish?
Although I’ve downloaded every available book in its electronic, pre-publication form, the NETS is one book that I won’t leave SBL/AAR 2007 without! For far too long, those interested in an English translation of the LXX have depended either on ancient and out-of-date translations from over a century ago or non-scholastic, extremely dynamic/paraphrased versions released by the Roman Catholic or Eastern Orthodox church (and shaded by those organizations and their agendas). But no more! There is a new English translation in the mix and I can attest through use of the electronic version that this thing is not only fun to read, but brilliant!
Compiled from every UK album (with the exception of Abbey Road, which I have not yet heard), both Past Masters volumes, and including the reunion EPs. In terms of sheer number of favorites, Help! ranks above them all. However, if I had to pick, I think Revolver might be my all-time favorite Beatles record. Except for a few songs, The White Album is The Beatles’ biggest disappointment IMHO.
- I Saw Her Standing There – Please Please Me
- All My Loving – With The Beatles
- A Hard Day’s Night – A Hard Day’s Night
- I Don’t Want To Spoil The Party – Beatles For Sale
- Help! - Help!
- The Night Before – Help!
- You’ve Got To Hide Your Love Away – Help!
- Ticket To Ride – Help!
- Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown) – Rubber Soul
- Girl – Rubber Soul
- Eleanor Rigby – Revolver
- Tomorrow Never Knows – Revolver
- Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds – Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band
- Being For The Benefit of Mr. Kite - Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band
- Magical Mystery Tour – Magical Mystery Tour
- All You Need Is Love – Magical Mystery Tour
- Back In The U.S.S.R. - White Album
- Hey Bulldog – Yellow Submarine
- Across the Universe – Let It Be
- She Loves You – Past Masters Vol 1
- She’s A Woman – Past Masters Vol 1
- Paperback Writer – Past Masters Vol 2
- Hey Jude – Past Masters Vol 2
- Free As A Bird – Free As A Bird EP
- Real Love – Real Love EP
A “fantasia” is a musical composition with its roots in the art of improvisation. Because of this, it seldom approximates the textbook rules of any strict musical form. Fantasia is the name of Walt Disney’s third full-length feature film and the first color motion picture to combine live-action with animation. It is also the first movie ever heard in stereophonic sound rather than the usual mono, and when Fantasia premiered on November 13, 1940, it left many audiences baffled and confused. Today, Fantasia still stands utterly alone, an entire genre solely unto itself known as the “Concert Feature” or “Cine-symphony.” It is both visualized music and pictorial sound, auditory picture and aural imagery. It has no opening titles or closing credits; its content is often surreal and abstract.
In short, Fantasia is the only movie of its kind. It won two Honorary Academy Awards, one for the “outstanding contribution to the advancement of the use of sound in motion pictures” and another for its “unique achievement in the creation of a new form of visualized music thereby widening the scope of the motion picture as entertainment and as an art form.” Fantasia was ahead of that time, and since it seldom approximated the textbook rules of any musical or any cinematic form, its title is most appropriate.
Although an exhibition tour was available (Tuesdays through Sunday’s at 3 p.m.), I chose to avoid the mass of sheep and go solo. This usually provided me an unspoilt view of each and every artifact.
The exhibit began with an introduction to St. Catherine’s Monastery at Sinai. Then, suddenly, I was staring a 1500-year-old, hot wax icon of Saint Peter in the face. From there, I wandered back and forth, learning about the Greek word behind “icon” and the 8th Century persecution called the Iconoclasm.
Hopefully, you enjoy gold… The icons used a background of gold not only to illuminate and give the subjects or scenes an aura of holiness, but to create a kind of negative space that seemed to separate the images from their canvas and bring them into the worshiper’s reality. Many employed an illusion of light in the gold backdrop so that golden halos and golden shafts of light (usually impregnating Mariam) stood out as you moved around in front of the icon. Some icons featured portraits of saints and angels. Others featured scenes in sequence to create a visual narrative of biblical events. There were even quite a few whose purpose was calendrical. They came in single panes, diptych, triptych, some were encapsulated in elaborate forms like a cathedral, others were painted on the doors leading from the “holy place” to the “most holy place” in the Orthodox sanctuary. There were several icons so stunning, I was suspended in front of them and could easily understand how they drew people into worship as a kind of mediator, linking the viewer with the divine.
There was a brief documentary on St. Catherine’s Monastery and its icons, which I had already seen. Interested parties—until recently—had the opportunity to request a free DVD which presented the documentary and a video on the exhibition accompanied by Greek Orthodox chant.
When it ended, I couldn’t leave without purchasing a few Orthodox chant CDs and two postcards with some of my favorite icons on them. Although it was difficult, I gave the books a pass. They were quite pricey.
Although I rushed myself through the last part, the entire exhibit took about an hour and a half. Speedier observers could get through in an hour or less. Don’t forget to swing by the Illuminated Gospel Manuscripts.
Overall, it was a great experience and I highly recommend it to both iconoclasts and iconophiles.
Those who love ambient, dark ambient, or neofolk can say who Caul is, but can they say who God is without putting him in a box? How can a time-bound man with his limited reason understand or describe Him Whom is timeless and infinite? Caul’s latest offering, free to download from Dark Winter, is a musical expression of this apophatic theology. Here in the spiritual-sonicscape of Apophasis is no doctrinal statement, but mystery, question, awe, and worship.
