ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Tower Of Babel Scattering

In Genesis 11 we read the account of the tower of Babel. Is it possible that when God scatterd man He did so by dashing to pieces the surface of the Earth. Thus saying that when the dry land appeared it was actualy in what we would call Pangea?

Moderator - No. Pangea is a myth.

Join Our Christian Dating and Take The Obedience Bible Quiz
 ---Ryan on 9/18/06
     Helpful Blog Vote (4)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



I feel that the Pangea theory deserves a 2nd look by some here. It is not an exclusive evolutionary idea. It was used for years by creationist explaining the effects of Noah's flood. As there is ample evidence that there is still shifting in land masses today, as evidences by earthquakes.
---dan on 3/1/08


Ryan: Although I'd agree the Continents did 'fit together' at one time, I would def. not place their separation as late as Genesis 11 but rather during the Flood Catastrophes of Genesis 7! See my reply to the Moderator below for more info.
---danie9374 on 2/29/08


Genesis 1 says, "Let the waters be gathered into one place, and let dry land appear."
If there were just one sea, then it follows there was just one proto-continent.
If the Bible is not describing Pangea here, I don't know what else it could be talking about.
The scattering of Genesis 11 was a migration of people, not shattering of Pangea.
---Jack on 5/18/07


Daniel, it's the theory of Pangea that is a myth as it is an evolution theory that is a false science/religion. The shape of the land masses is determined by the water level not by the land masses being connected in the way Pangea explains. Of course the shape of the earth's surface changed during and directly after the flood.
---Moderator on 9/28/06


danie9374, The Moderator can fight his own battles.
Now you come up with your thoughts are a good theory yet you reject others. Do you have any idea what you are fighting about? You don't like it because the Moderator said your little belief was a myth. Well, the next time I see him I'll make him stand in the corner and take away his lollipops for taking to you that way. The Moderator is the one who gives you your voice here and you want him to be quiet?
---Elder on 9/27/06




Elder, does your "my opinion that the earth land mass separated like it did because of the Great Flood" comment mean you do agree that all the continents could have been much closer together before the Flood, or not? All I objected to was Moderator calling that a 'myth', when it's at least a good theory that's not against Scripture!
---danie9374 on 9/27/06


/3/ ...but there's no Scripture to prove it's wrong. [Thus the reason 'fairy-tales' are mentioned instead of Scripture.] 4) I'm now thinking that the Moderator's comments on 'continents being connected' was supposed refer to 'shallow land bridges' animals and humans could have used until the level of the oceans covered them. This is also what I believe! When the Flood caused huge amounts of ice to accumulate at both poles and parts of the continents, there would have been lower ocean levels.
---danie9374 on 9/27/06


/2/ 2) My first reply here was that continents could have 'fit together' (in some general way, not necessarily one solid mass), and Genesis 1:9-10 makes that a possibility. 3) Whatever one calls that possible 'clumping of continents', there's no Biblical reason to call it a 'myth', since Genesis allows for its possibility. My only reason for quoting references (ICR, AiG, etc.) was to show this is a viable 'Young-earth Creationist' theory; you don't have to believe it,... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/27/06


Elder now says: "Danie, Oh I see no lava no connecting right?" Wrong! That should be: 'No lava, then definitely are connecting.' From the way you're writing to me, I wonder if you understand any of these points about me:
1) I do not agree with Ryan's belief that continents moved apart in Genesis 11 (Tower of Babel). The destruction this would have caused (and there isn't a single word in Scripture about that) literally 'wipes out' his reasons for wanting to believe it!
---danie9374 on 9/27/06


Danie, Oh I see no lava no connecting right?
Your statement, "Dr. Walter Brown, believes the continents were all closer to each other in the past."
Who said they were not? It was not the Moderator or myself?
It is my opinion that the earth land mass separated like it did because of the Great Flood.
You pick what ever floats your boat.
---Elder on 9/26/06




Elder: My HYPOTHETICAL statement was a reply to both yours and the Moderator's repeatedly using the phrase "the continents are still connected together"; which doesn't say much, SINCE any time the crust opens up and lava comes out, say under the oceans, it will eventually turn back into solid rock. So, of course, the continents are connected. However much they may have moved apart, it doesn't take all that long for lava or mantle material to become solid again!
---danie9374 on 9/25/06


Elder: You asked if I realize the water coninued to rise after the rain. Yes! If you'd read these Creationist's proposal; in case you missed my '*4*' comment below: "the level of the ocean floor would rise up, and thus flood the land", you'd know that. It's illegal to quote too MANY WORDS of books or Net pages, so please search the ICR and AiG web sites. Even Dr. Walter Brown, who has a different theory of his own, believes the continents were all closer to each other in the past.
---danie9374 on 9/26/06


No, the earth was broken up as a part of the flood cataclysm. "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." (Gen 7:11) Bablyon was built later by Noah's grandson, Nimrod. (Gen 10:9, 10)
---jerry6593 on 9/23/06


danie9374,
Like your statement, "Of course the continents are 'connected' under the oceans; if not, the seas would be full of molten lava!" How do you come to that conclusion?
Then your 40 day and nights of rain to flood the earth... Do you realize that after the rain the water levels continued to rise?
Maybe you need to do some reading of the Bible and you might understand where we are coming from.
---Elder on 9/23/06


Moderator: Why do you allow evolutionists to dictate word meaning for us? Who in this blog, except you, defined Pangea that way; it's only the idea continents may have all been clumped together at one time. YOU'VE added it MUST mean 'billions of years, and is only an evolutionary _belief_!' OK, we now define such a land mass as 'OMPCOL' and add all continenets had to separate during the Genesis Flood, so you can't associate Ompcol with billion-years evolution! That doesn't change what I quoted below.

Moderator - That is how Pangea is defined. It is an evolution concept not Biblical.
---danie9374 on 9/22/06


My Understanding of Tower of Babel, is the beginning of speaking in TonguesFrom verse One they had the same language, and they where confused so as not to archieve with their work of building the tower. Their main aim was that should floods come again, they would ot drown like the time of Noah
---ZIMBABWEAN on 9/22/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Affiliate Program


Moderator: You just ended my 5-part comments with "Nothing you mentioned here makes a case for an old earth." Why did you say that? Whatever gave you the impression I was anything but a recent (less than 10K yrs. 'young-earth' if you prefer) Creationist; no 'long-age gaps' in Genesis, Christian?

Moderator - Because the Pangea belief is that the earth is 4 billion years old and is an evolution theory not creatism.
---danie9374 on 9/21/06


*5* pre-flood ocean floor was subducted, and have little movement today! Curiously, that says basically the same thing Moderator did about sea levels, right? Again, as I said before, this is a theory (subject to change), be cautious, but please don't call it a 'myth'! Hopefully, some will take the time to study the view of Catastrophic Plate Tectonics now; use Google to find Baumgardner's words on various Creation sites. There's a whole lot more to it than the little I wrote here!

Moderator - Nothing you mentioned here makes a case for an old earth.
---danie9374 on 9/20/06


*4* rain could easily last for 40 days and thereby explain why God's Word is always true; i.e., 'floodgates of the sky' (see my earlier comments on why the 'vapor canopy theory' has been rejected by Creation scientists as the only source of this rain)! At the same time, the level of the ocean floor would rise up, and thus flood the land. This theory not only explains how plates could quickly move (within months) across the mantle, but predicts they would come to a standstill when the entire... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/20/06


*3* the possibility of a rapid (called runaway) subduction of a pre-flood ocean floor into the mantle. The condition would not only drag plates of the earth along with it, but release so much mantle lava into the ocean it would vaporize large amounts of water rising as superheated geysers of steam into the atmosphere along the whole spreading length of these sinking ocean plates (which could be what Genesis 7:11 describes as 'fountains of the deep'); the resulting condensation as global... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/20/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Abortion Facts


*2* ...quickly labeled a theory that aligns with Scripture, proposed by Bible believers (with growing evidence) a 'myth'; yet appeared to know nothing about it. Now (unless you never examined it), I wonder if there's some other reason. A few comments for those who don't feel it's worth reading about: People generally don't know it wasn't until as late as 1960s, geologists began to beleive in moving plates; until then THEY considered continents stationary! However, few of them ever considered... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/20/06


*1* Elder and Moderator: It seems you still haven't read much (any?) of the sources I posted. Of course the continents are 'connected' under the oceans; if not, the seas would be full of molten lava! I never said they weren't! But neither does that mean they were always exactly as they are today! BTW, so we know where you stand on the issue, do you believe in a recent (<10K yrs.) Creation of the Universe, or 'long ages' (or 'gap') instead? It bothered me that the Moderator (then you)... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/20/06


Philologists all agree that the Indo-European language, the basic language we all speak, came from an area south of Turky. If you look at a modern map showing the origins of the language, and a map of where the Ark landed, they are the same area of the Earth.
---mike8384 on 9/20/06


danie9374, you do not have to like or agree with the theory, it doesn't bother me either way. It has no bearing on salvation if you believe it or not. As far as all the learned men that you value it was these same type of men that killed Christ so it matters not to me if they agree with me or not. I like the theory and it helps explain how animals got from the middle east to Australia, The Americas and other distant continents.
---Ryan on 9/20/06


Send a Free New Year Ecard


Peleg (split) was the 5th grandfather before Abram (that is Abraham) as well as the 5th grandson of Shem, son of Noah. Abraham was the father of Isaac and Ishmael...and the 2 nations from their seed (at Abraham's request for God to bless Ishmael too) are still here today... and are fighting.
---Amy9384 on 9/20/06


Danie if the continents are not connected by land masses under the waters then what is holding the world together? Could it be all that fishing string I have lost over the years?
A lake or pond is connected by the land under the water. Drain one and you will see.
My statement, if you will read it, was just because the Bible doesn't call something a myth doesn't mean that it is not.
---Elder on 9/20/06


Good explanation Ryan. I am glad to know that you read your scriptures... and you read a little further than the interesting story to learn a little miniscule fact that changed your understanding of how God worked in that particular situation. I hope that you get justice and apologies from everyone...once they read the words of God for themselves. Now I know more about why God allowed me to catch that part of the same verse too.
---Amy9384 on 9/20/06


This same passage was written down in detail again in 1Chronicles 1:19.
the names in the bible have meaning. We have intellect to use to make sense of things.
The land split, fellas (ladies included). It was after the flood some years... and after the language change at Babel.
God provided the answers. He didn't dash to pieces the surface of the earth, He divided it during the days of Peleg.
Logic tells me that there were probably earthquakes and natural disasters.
---Amy9384 on 9/19/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Acne Treatment


Peleg's name means "division"
The whole earth split (Pawlag) is what the phrase means in the Strong's Concordance. Peleg's name is a pun on pawlag (split).
Joktan's name means "smallness".
Eber's name means "the region beyond"
All mentioned together... The region beyond split smallness.
---Amy9384 on 9/19/06


The Bible says ...Genesis 10:25 Two sons were born to Eber: One was named Peleg, [l] because in his time the earth was divided; his brother was named Joktan.
Pangea existed. It is LOGICAL. Make your own puzzle with the maps...and allow for loss of land. It fits rather well.
We all KNOW that the land is all still there under the oceans and lakes. That point alone does not prove Pangea wrong. God proves Pangea was real by His inspired words.
---Amy9384 on 9/19/06


-2- We all need to be careful when 'studying' Scripture: that we're actually being taught by the Spirit; not just having misplaced thoughts of our own! What Bible translations agree with YOUR thoughts here, Ryan? What do you know of the Hebrew Text? What Bible church agrees with this view? What scientists who are also Christians think it's correct? I'm not saying these things to be argumentative, but because I care about the truth of Scripture and opposing whatever leads us away from obtaining it.
---danie9374 on 9/19/06


-1- Ryan: You said, 'I put very little stock in man' Well, isn't that where your present view of Babel comes from? If it wasn't from some man you read or heard and didn't tell us about, then you're that man, because you haven't shown us any Scripture, word studies, or just historical or factual evidence that backs-up what you're saying. It 'sounds righteous' whenever someone says, 'We should believe God, not man' but it's only true for doctrine that actually comes from God! [Cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/19/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Bad Credit Loans


Well I will respctfully agree to disagree with all of you. When I study the tower of Babel account it is clear to me that God dashed to pieces the surface of the Earth and scattered them into our current continents. Let us keep in mind that this was thousands of years ago and the world may have been changed at God's will (For insight into God's awesome power read Job 38-41). And I always keep in mind that with God all things are possibel. I put very little stock in man.
---Ryan on 9/19/06


Excuse me whoever out there is named Randy. I obviously meant Ryan. :)
---Leon on 9/19/06


\1\ Moderator: The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) which prints what they call Impact articles every month; they're at #400 now, did one way back in 1976 titled: Continental Drift, Plate Tectonics, and the Bible' #32, by Stuart E. Nevins, and part of his conclusion was: "Despite these failures in the modern theory of 'plate tectonics,' the notion that the earth's surface has been deformed at the margins... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/19/06


Moderator: Did you look the material I suggested? There's a 7-part forum between John Baumgardner and Michael Oard (both are Creationists) on this topic in Vol.16 (APR2002) of TJ Magazine online. Furthermore, AiG's Ken Ham, Jonathan Sarfati, Carl Wieland and Don Batten agree with Baumgardner in their "What about continental drift?" at AiG. Though not a proven fact, it's a working theory by Young Earth Biblical Believers and certainly shouldn't be called a myth!

Moderator - The continents have always been connected and still are today. I believe the other people don't understand that it is the level of the water that determines the land mass that is above water.
---danie9374 on 9/18/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Bankruptcy


Moderator: Very Little? Have you ever been in a california earthquake? It moves a lot.

Moderator - It moves back and forth alot, however it doesn't move that much in terms of changing the beach front property. The beach front is mostly determined by the water level, not earthquakes.
---NurseRobert on 9/18/06


\4\ 'waters above' (Ps.148:4) referred to more than just normal rain clouds, etc., but now admit they were wrong. Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: A Global Flood Model of Earth History in 1994, by Steve Austin, J.R. Baumgardner, D.R. Humphreys, A.A. Snelling, Larry Vardimann, and K.P. Wise documents what Creation scientists consider a much better theory of the Genesis Flood.
---danie9374 on 9/19/06


\3\ of something found in Scripture, that it's somehow equal to what the Bible itself says, and can't be retracted or altered! E.g. early on, Creationists suggested a water vapor canopy might explain where all the water for the Flood came from, but now we know a canopy holding only 7-feet of rain would create greenhouse heating beyond which life could even exist on earth! So they altered their theories just like any scientist should. At one time they believed the phrase in Scripture,... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/19/06


\2\ of moving plate-like slabs appears to be a valid one. The facts indicate that the separation of the continents, rifting of the ocean floor, and underthrusting of ocean trenches, were accomplished by rapid processes, not occurring today, initiated by a catastrophic mechanism." No one at ICR has rejected this. Christians need to be very careful they don't harbor some false notion that just because a Creationist puts forth a view that appears to explain all the details... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/19/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Cash Advance


Randy: That would be fine except for one thing, i.e., the Bible doesn't say what you're proposing & you (I, we) shouldn't try to make it say what it doesn't say. That's called eisegesis.

Also, the object lesson in Gen. 11:1-9 is specifically about God's disapproval & judgment upon "the one language people" because their actions displeased Him . Verses 1-9 have nothing to do with the land mass being dashed into pieces & scattered.
---Leon on 9/19/06


[2] verb 'poots' (Strongs 06327a) always means 'disperse' or 'scatter' and is trans. in the LXX as diaspeirw like the 'Diaspora' (or dispersion) of the Jews mentioned in James 1:1. Furthermore, there was no reason at all for God to have to break-up the whole earth just to scatter people who could no longer talk with each other!
---danie9374 on 9/18/06


[1] Ryan: First, if the continents all separated in Gen.11, it would be a catastrophe at least if not more destructive than the Genesis Flood and instead of moving people apart, would have more likely ended their existence! Yet there's no evidence of such an event more recent than the Flood!
Next, I see no support whatsoever in the Hebrew Text for your trans. of Gen.11:8 as 'dashing to pieces the land' instead of 'scattering the people'. The word here ('wayyahpets') from the... [cont.]
---danie9374 on 9/18/06


Elder: Have you studied or read enough on the subject for such a comment; see my reply to the Moderator.
---danie9374 on 9/18/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Counseling


Leon Genesis 11:8 is the scripture I am refrencing. The punishment at the tower of Babel was the confusion of the languages but what I am proposing is that another part of the punishment is that the land mass was dashed into pieces and scattered. Do a word study on Gen 11:4, 11:8, & 11:9 you'll see that the words used here all relate to earth not hummanity. This would explain how animals got from where Noah landed to Australia or North America.
---Ryan on 9/18/06


Moderator, are you saying that the land is not moving?

Moderator - Very little, however the water levels have greatly changed over time.
---NurseRobert on 9/18/06


danie9374 does the Scripture have to say "Pangea" is a myth for it to be so?
Is the Tooth Fairy, Superman or Batman real? Does the Scripture say one way or another?
---Elder on 9/18/06


Under the water all land/Continents are still connected.
At the Tower of Babel people spoke in other tongues/languages. Because they did not understand each other they drifted apart and congregated with their own tongues.
The earth was formed as it is during the Great Flood. Water came from above and beneath.
There are streams of water running under the surface of the earth. That is why we drill wells, to tap into those water streams.
---Elder on 9/18/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Relief


Ryan: God "scattered man", not by land division; but, by tongue (language) confusion just as it is written in Gen. 11:6-8.
---Leon on 9/18/06


Moderator- Are you saying there was less water on the Earth during those times, or that the water level was somehow different? If so than are you suggesting that animals got to continents like Australia or North America by land bridges? I also find those to be intersting theories, but I like the Pangea one better because of the word study in Genesis 11. The scriptures literaly read: Gen 11:8
Jahovah dashed to pieces then the surface of the ground of the whole Earth.

Moderator - Yes, the water levels changed and yes there were land bridges. The water levels are still changing today although not nearly as much.
---Ryan on 9/18/06


greetings,the architect,bablot,a descendent of nod,had his plan to construct a city and tower,after approval the work continued for four and a half years.a dispute arose over the motive for its use once completed.one goup wanted it a a memorial for nodite history,the other a center for commerce and manufacture.the other wanted it to be a place of worship of the father of all.the debate fell to fighting and dispersion occured.another attempt took place 12 thou.yrs ago
---earl on 9/18/06


Moderator: As you all say so often, where in Scripture does it say 'Pangea' is a myth? I think you should Google that word under the 'answersingenesis' Org and see what turns up; actually, use the phrase 'continental drift' for the best results! What you shouldn't believe is that such movements took eons of time rather than the year of the Genesis Flood!

Moderator - There was no Pangea. The continents are still connected together. It's the water level that makes the land mass look a certain way. Most people just have not thought things out.
---danie9374 on 9/18/06


Read These Insightful Articles About Debt Settlement


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.