Which is more likely?

[Athetotheist]

Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there. They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 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; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 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. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 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.
(Genesis 11:1-9)

Is it more likely that this literally happened, or is it more likely that this was originally someone's answer when a child asked why people in different places have different languages?

[bjs1]

Is it more likely that this literally happened, or is it more likely that this was originally someone's answer when a child asked why people in different places have different languages?

I’m not sure how much this matters, but the passage does not say that this is why people in different places have different languages. I understand that some people interpret the passage that way. That is more of their own assumption, and it is far from a universal view of the passage.

For my part, I would not be comfortable reading my own ideas into a text and then thinking that my personal interpretation also explains the source of the story.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #2]

I’m not sure how much this matters, but the passage does not say that this is why people in different places have different languages. I understand that some people interpret the passage that way. That is more of their own assumption, and it is far from a universal view of the passage.

For my part, I would not be comfortable reading my own ideas into a text and then thinking that my personal interpretation also explains the source of the story.

The story starts with the whole world having one language and a common speech and ends with the people scattered over the whole earth with their languages confused. What else could it mean?

[bjs1]

The story starts with the whole world having one language and a common speech and ends with the people scattered over the whole earth with their languages confused. What else could it mean?

I can give you my personal interpretation. I claim it as nothing more than that, though I admit the ideas are not original to me.

The event took place. It has nothing to do with the development of languages. Languages develop slowly. The Tower of Babel is a story of arrogance and self-importance. It was not intended to tell us anything about how languages developed, but only inform us about this specific circumstance.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #4]

The event took place. It has nothing to do with the development of languages. Languages develop slowly. The Tower of Babel is a story of arrogance and self-importance. It was not intended to tell us anything about how languages developed, but only inform us about this specific circumstance.

But the story claims that this specific circumstance is why languages developed. People in one part of the world with one language end up all over the world not understanding one language anymore.

[bjs1]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #4]

The event took place. It has nothing to do with the development of languages. Languages develop slowly. The Tower of Babel is a story of arrogance and self-importance. It was not intended to tell us anything about how languages developed, but only inform us about this specific circumstance.

But the story claims that this specific circumstance is why languages developed. People in one part of the world with one language end up all over the world not understanding one language anymore.

Really? I read it again and I still can’t find that part. Where specifically does the story tell us that it is explaining the circumstances of why languages developed?

[RBD]

Now the whole world had one language and a common speech. As people moved eastward, they found a plain in Shinar and settled there. They said to each other, “Come, let’s make bricks and bake them thoroughly.” They used brick instead of stone, and tar for mortar. 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; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. 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. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.” So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. 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.
(Genesis 11:1-9)

Is it more likely that this literally happened, or is it more likely that this was originally someone's answer when a child asked why people in different places have different languages?

It's not an answer for anyone who still thinks as a child. Childish people think anything they don't like is childish.

1Co 13:11
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #6]

Really? I read it again and I still can’t find that part. Where specifically does the story tell us that it is explaining the circumstances of why languages developed?

I met a traveller from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them and the heart that fed:
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away..

If you were to read Percy Bysshe Shelley's poem, "Ozymandias" above and I were to tell you that it's about the impermanence of power and fame, would you ask me where specifically the poem explains that?

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to RBD in post #7]

It's not an answer for anyone who still thinks as a child. Childish people think anything they don't like is childish.

1Co 13:11
When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.

Instead of addressing my question about a child's potential question, you'd rather call me childish. So you looked up a Bible verse with the word "child" in it and flung it at me.

[OneJack]

[Replying to bjs1 in post #4]

The event took place. It has nothing to do with the development of languages. Languages develop slowly. The Tower of Babel is a story of arrogance and self-importance. It was not intended to tell us anything about how languages developed, but only inform us about this specific circumstance.

But the story claims that this specific circumstance is why languages developed. People in one part of the world with one language end up all over the world not understanding one language anymore.

Really? I read it again and I still can’t find that part. Where specifically does the story tell us that it is explaining the circumstances of why languages developed?

The word used by God is 'confuse,' not 'develop.' The Lord God gave them different languages to speak; hence, confusion came to them when they spoke with each other. They couldn't understand what they were saying to each other. All languages emanate only from God, across all generations.