Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Genesis 11:1

And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

1. the whole earth ] i.e. the inhabitants of the whole earth, as in Gen 10:25.

one language one speech ] An expressive phrase, denoting that the generations of primitive man, being of one stock, continued to speak one common language. The Jewish tradition, which was followed by Christian tradition, as represented by Patristic, mediaeval, and many modern writers, assumed that Hebrew was the primitive language. This, however, was an assumption resting on no more satisfactory foundation than (1) the proper names of the early Genesis narratives, and (2) the supposition that the language of the Chosen People was sacred and therefore aboriginal. The whole theory has been disproved by the scientific comparative study of languages, and of Hebrew and the cognate Semitic languages in particular.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

– The Confusion of Tongues

1. nasa pluck out, break up, journey. mqedem eastward, or on the east side as in Gen 2:14; Gen 13:11; Isa 9:11 (12).

6. hachlam their beginning, for hachlam, the regular form of this infinitive with a suffix. yazmu as if from yazam = zamam.

7. nab^elah usually said to be for nabolah from balal; but evidently designed by the punctuator to be the third singular feminine perfect of nabal to be confounded, having for its subject sapah, and there let their lip be confounded. The two verbs have the same root.

9. babel Babel, confusion, derived from bl the common root of balal and nabel, by doubling the first radical.

Having completed the table of nations, the sacred writer, according to his wont, goes back to record an event of great moment, both for the explanation of this table and for the future history of the human race. The point to which he reverts is the birth of Peleg. The present singular passage explains the nature of that unprecedented change by which mankind passed from one family with a mutually intelligible speech, into many nations of diverse tongues and lands.

Gen 11:1

The previous state of human language is here briefly described. The whole land evidently means the whole then known world with all its human inhabitants. The universality of application is clearly and constantly maintained throughout the whole passage. Behold, the people is one. And the close is on this point in keeping with the commencement. Therefore was the name of it called Babel, because the Lord had there confounded the lip of all the land.

Of one lip, and one stock: of words. – In the table of nations the term tongue was used to signify what is here expressed by two terms. This is not undesigned. The two terms are not synonymous or parallel, as they form the parts of one compound predicate. One stock of words, then, we conceive, naturally indicates the matter, the substance, or material of language. This was one and the same to the whole race. The term lip, which is properly one of the organs of articulation, is, on the other hand, used to denote the form, that is, the manner, of speaking; the mode of using and connecting the matter of speech; the system of laws by which the inflections and derivations of a language are conducted. This also was one throughout the human family. Thus, the sacred writer has expressed the unity of language among mankind, not by a single term as before, but, with a view to his present purpose, by a combination of terms expressing the two elements which go to constitute every organic reality.

Gen 11:2-4

The occasion of the linguage change about to be described is here narrated. As they journeyed eastward. The word they refers to the whole land of the previous verse, which is put by a common figure for the whole race of man. Eastward is proved to be the meaning of the phrase mqedem by Gen 13:11, where Lot is said to journey ( mqedem) from Bethel to the plain of the Jordan, which is to the east. The human race, consisting it might be of five hundred families, journeys eastward, with a few points of deflection to the south, along the Euphrates valley, and comes to a plain of surpassing fertility in the land of Shinar (Herod. 1:178, 193). A determination to make a permanent abode in this productive spot is immediately formed.

Gen 11:3-4

A building is to be erected of brick and asphalt. The Babylonian soil is still celebrated for these architectural materials. There is here a fine clay, mingled with sand, forming the very best material for brick, while stones are not to be found at a convenient distance. Asphalt is found boiling up from the soil in the neighborhood of Babylon and of the Dead Sea, which is hence called the lacus Asphaltites. The asphalt springs of Is or Hit on the Euphrates are celebrated by many writers. Burn them thoroughly. Sun-dried bricks are very much used in the East for building purposes. These, however, were to be burned, and thereby rendered more durable. Brick for stone. This indicates a writer belonging to a country and an age in which stone buildings were familiar, and therefore not to Babylonia. Brickmaking was well known to Moses in Egypt; but this country also abounds in quarries and splendid erections of stone, and the Sinaitic peninsula is a mass of granitic hills. The Shemites mostly inhabited countries abounding in stone. Asphalt for mortar. Asphalt is a mineral pitch. The word rendered mortar means at first clay, and then any kind of cement.

Gen 11:4

The purpose of their hearts is now more fully expressed. Let us build us a city, and a tower whose top may be in the skies. A city is a fortified enclosure or keep for defense against the violence of the brute creation. A tower whose top may be in the skies for escape from the possibility of a periodical deluge. This is the language of pride in man, who wishes to know nothing above himself, and to rise beyond the reach of an over-ruling Providence. And let us make us a name. A name indicates distinction and pre-eminence. To make us a name, then, is not so much the cry of the multitude as of the few, with Nimrod at their head, who alone could expect what is not common, but distinctive. It is here artfully inserted, however, in the popular exclamation, as the people are prone to imagine the glory even of the despot to be reflected on themselves. This gives the character of a lurking desire for empire and self-aggrandizement to the design of the leaders – a new form of the same selfish spirit which animated the antediluvian men of name Gen 6:4. But despotism for the few or the one, implies slavery and all its unnumbered ills for the many. Lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole land. The varied instincts of their common nature here speak forth. The social bond, the tie of kinsmanship, the wish for personal safety, the desire to be independent, perhaps even of God, the thirst for absolute power, all plead for union; but it is union for selfish ends.

Gen 11:5-7

These verses describe the nature of that change by which this form of human selfishness is to be checked. The Lord came down. The interposing providence of God is here set forth in a sublime simplicity, suited to the early mind of man. Still there is something here characteristic of the times after the deluge. The presence of the Lord seems not to have been withdrawn from the earth before that event. He walked in the garden when Adam and Eve were there. He placed the ministers and symbols of his presence before it when they were expelled. He expostulated with Cain before and after his awful crime. He said, My Spirit shall not always strive with man. He saw the wickedness of man; and the land was corrupt before him. He communicated with Noah in various ways, and finally established his covenant with him. In all this he seems to have been present with man on earth. He lingered in the garden as long as his forbearance could be expected to influence man for good. He at length appointed the limit of a hundred and twenty years. And after watching over Noah during the deluge, he seems to have withdrawn his visible and gracious presence from the earth. Hence, the propriety of the phrase, the Lord came down. He still deals in mercy with a remnant of the human race, and has visited the earth and manifested His presence in a wondrous way. But He has not yet taken up His abode among people as He did in the garden, and as He intimates that He will sometime do on the renovated earth.

Gen 11:6

In like simplicity is depicted the self-willed, God-defying spirit of combination and ambition which had now budded in the imagination of man. The People is one – one race, with one purpose. And they have all one lip. They understand one anothers mind. No misunderstanding has arisen from diversity of language. This is their beginning. The beginning of sin, like that of strife, is as when one letteth out water. The Lord sees in this commencement the seed of growing evil. All sin is dim and small in its first rise; but it swells by insensible degrees to the most glaring and gigantic proportions. And now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Now that they have made this notable beginning of concentration, ambition, and renown, there is nothing in this way which they will not imagine or attempt.

Gen 11:7

Here is announced the means by which the defiant spirit of concentration is to be defeated. From this and the previous verse we learn that the lip, and not the stock of words, is the part of language which is to be affected, and hence, perceive the propriety of distinguishing these two in the introductory statement. To confound, is to introduce several kinds, where before there was only one; and so in the present case to introduce several varieties of form, whereas language was before of one form. Hence, it appears that the one primitive tongue was made manifold by diversifying the law of structure, without interfering with the material of which it was composed. The bases or roots of words are furnished by instinctive and evanescent analogies between sounds and things, on which the etymological law then plays its part, and so vocables come into existence. Thus, from the root fer, we get fer, ferre, ferens, fert, ferebat, feret, ferat, ferret; phere, pherein, pheron, pherei, ephere, phere, pheroi, etc.; p^ereh, paroh, o poreh, parah, ypreh, etc., according to the formative law of each language.

It is evident that some roots may become obsolete and so die out, while others, according to the exigencies of communication and the abilities of the speaker, may be called into existence in great abundance. But whatever new words come into the stock, are made to comply with the formative law which regulates the language of the speaker. This law has been fixed as the habitude of his mind, from which he only deviates on learning and imitating some of the formative processes of another tongue. In the absence of any other language, it is not conceivable that he should on any account alter this law. To do so would be to rebel against habit without reason, and to put himself out of relation with the other speakers of the only known tongue.

The sacred writer does not care to distinguish the ordinary from the extraordinary in the procedure of Divine Providence, inasmuch as he ascribes all events to the one creating, superintending, and administering power of God. Yet there is something beyond nature here. We can understand and observe the introduction of new words into the vocabulary of man as often as the necessity of designating a new object or process calls the naming faculty into exercise. But the new word, whether a root or not, if engrafted into the language, invariably obeys the formative law of the speech into which it is admitted. A nation adds new words to its vocabulary, but does not of itself, without external influence, alter the principle on which they are formed. Here, then, the divine interference was necessary, if the uniform was ever to become multiform. And accordingly this is the very point in which the historian marks the interposition of the Almighty.

Philologists have distinguished three or four great types or families of languages. The first of these was the Shemitic or Hebrew family. It is probable that most of the Shemites spoke dialects of this well-defined type of human speech. Aram (the Syrians), Arpakshad, (the Hebrews and Arabs), and Asshur (the Assyrians), certainly did so. Elam (Elymais), succumbed first to the Kushite race ( Kissioi, Kossaioi) and afterward to the Persian, and so lost its language and its individuality among the nations. Lud (the Lydians) was also overrun by other nationalities. But this type of language was extended beyond the Shemites to the Kenaanites and perhaps some other Hamites. It includes the language of the Old Testament.

The second family of languages has been variously designated Japhetic, Indo-Germanic, Indo-European and Arian. It is spoken by the great bulk of the descendants of Japheth, and embraces a series of cognate modes of communication, extending from India to the various European colonies of America. It includes Greek, the tongue of the New Testament.

A third class, including the Kushite (Babylonian), Egyptian, and other African languages, has been termed Hamitic. Some of its stocks have affinities both with the Shemitic and Japhetic families.

It is probable that the congeries of unclassed languages (Allophylian, Sporadic, Turanian), including even the Chinese tongues, have relations more or less intimate with one or other of these three tolerably definite families. But the science of comparative philology is only approaching the solution of its final problem, the historical or natural relationship of all the languages of the world. It is evident, however, that the principle of classification is not so much the amount of roots in common, as the absence or presence of a given form. The diversity in the matter may be brought about by assignable natural causes; but the diversity in the form can only arise from a preternatural impulse. Forms may wear off; but they do not pass from one constituent law to another without foreign influence. The speech of a strong and numerous race may gradually overbear and annihilate that of a weak one; and in doing so may adopt many of its words, but by no means its form. So long as a national speech retains any of its forms, they continue to be part of that special type by which it is characterized.

Hence, we perceive that the interposition of Providence in confounding the lip of mankind, is the historical solution of the enigma of philology; the existence of diversity of language at the same time with the natural persistency of form and the historical unity of the human race. The data of philology, indicating that the form is the side of language needing to be touched in order to produce diversity, coincide also with the facts here narrated. The preternatural diversification of the form, moreover, marks the order amid variety which prevailed in this great revolution of mental habitude. It is not necessary to suppose that seventy languages were produced from one at the very crisis of this remarkable change, but only the few generic forms that sufficed to effect the divine purpose, and by their interaction to give origin to all subsequent varieties of language or dialect. Nor are we to imagine that the variant principles of formation went into practical development all at once, but only that they started a process which, in combination with other operative causes, issued in all the diversities of speech which are now exhibited in the human race.

That they may not understand one anothers lip. – This is the immediate result of diversifying the formative law of human speech, even though the material elements were to remain much the same as before. Further results will soon appear.

Gen 11:8-9

The effect of the divine interposition is noted in Gen 11:8-9. And the Lord scattered them abroad. Not understanding one anothers mode of speech, they feel themselves practically separated from one another. Unity of counsel and of action becomes impossible. Misunderstanding naturally follows, and begets mistrust. Diversity of interest grows up, and separation ensues. Those who have a common speech retreat from the center of union to a sequestered spot, where they may form a separate community among themselves. The lack of pasture for their flocks and provision for themselves leads to a progressive migration. Thus, the divine purpose, that they should be fruitful and multiply and replenish the land Gen 9:1 is fulfilled. The dispersion of mankind at the same time put an end to the ambitious projects of the few. They left off to build the city. It is probable that the people began to see through the plausible veil which the leaders had cast over their selfish ends. The city would henceforth be abandoned to the immediate party of Nimrod. This would interrupt for a time the building of the city. Its dwellings would probably be even too numerous for its remaining inhabitants. The city received the name of Babel (confusion), from the remarkable event which had interrupted its progress for a time.

This passage, then, explains the table of nations, in which they are said to be distinguished, not merely by birth and land, but every one after his tongue. It is therefore attached to the table as a needful appendix, and thus completes the history of the nations so far as it is carried on by the Bible. At this point the line of history leaves the universal, and by a rapid contraction narrows itself into the individual, in the person of him who is to be ultimately the parent of a chosen seed, in which the knowledge of God and of his truth is to be preserved, amidst the degeneracy of the nations into the ignorance and error which are the natural offspring of sin.

Here, accordingly, ends the appendix to the second Bible, or the second volume of the revelation of God to man. As the first may have been due to Adam, the second may be ascribed in point of matter to Noah, with Shem as his continuator. The two joined together belong not to a special people, but to the universal race. If they had ever appeared in a written form before Moses, they might have descended to the Gentiles as well as to the Israelites. But the lack of interest in holy things would account for their disappearance among the former. The speakers of the primitive language, however, would alone retain the knowledge of such a book if extant. Some of its contents might be preserved in the memory, and handed down to the posterity of the founders of the primeval nations. Accordingly we find more or less distinct traces of the true God, the creation, the fall and the deluge, in the traditions of all nations that have an ancient history.

But even if this two-volumed Bible were not possessed by the nations in a written form, its presence here, at the head of the writings of divine truth, marks the catholic design of the Old Testament, and intimates the comprehension of the whole family of man within the merciful purposes of the Almighty. In the issues of Providence the nations appear now to be abandoned to their own devices. Such a judicial forsaking of a race, who had a second time heard the proclamation of his mercy, and a second time forsaken the God of their fathers, was naturally to be expected. But it is never to be forgotten that God twice revealed his mercy to the whole human race before they were left to their own ways. And even when they were given over to their own willful unrighteousness and ungodlincss, it was only to institute and develop the mystery by which they might be again fully and effectually brought back to reconciliation with God.

The new developments of sin during this period are chiefly three – drunkenness, dishonoring of a parent, and the ambitious attempt to be independent of Gods power, and to thwart his purpose of peopling the land. These forms of human selfishness still linger about the primary commands of the two tables. Insubordination to the supreme authority of God is accompanied with disrespect to parental authority. Drunkenness itself is an abuse of the free grant of the fruit of the trees orignally made to man. These manifestations of sin do not advance to the grosser or more subtle depths of iniquity afterward explicitly forbidden in the ten commandments. They indicate a people still comparatively unsophisticated in their habits.

The additional motives brought to bear on the race of man during the interval from Noah to Abraham, are the preaching of Noah, the perdition of the unbelieving antediluvians, the preservation of Noah and his family, the distinction of clean and unclean animals, the permission to partake of animal food, the special prohibition of the shedding of mans blood, the institution thereupon of civil government, and the covenant with Noah and his seed that there should not be another deluge.

The preaching of Noah consisted in pressing the invitations and warnings of divine mercy on a wicked race. But it bore with new power on the succeeding generations, when it was verified by the drowning of the impenitent race and the saving of the godly household. This was an awful demonstration at the same time of the divine vengeance on those who persisted in sin, and of the divine mercy to the humble and the penitent. The distinction of the clean and the unclean was a special warning against that conformity with the world by which the sons of God had died out of the human race. The permission to partake of animal food was in harmony with the physical constitution of man, and seems to have been delayed until this epoch for moral as well as physical reasons. In the garden, and afterward in Eden, the vegetable products of the soil were adequate to the healthy sustenance of man. But in the universal diffusion of the human race, animal food becomes necessary.

In some regions where man has settled, this alone is available for a great portion of the year, if not for the whole. And a salutary dread of death, as the express penalty of disobedience, was a needful lesson in the infancy of the human race. But the overwhelming destruction of the doomed race was sufficient to impress this lesson indelibly on the minds of the survivors. Hence, the permission of animal food might now be safely given, especially when accompanied with the express prohibition of manslaying, under the penalty of death by the hands of the executioner. This prohibition was directly intended to counteract the bad example of Cain and Lamek, and to deter those who slew animals from slaying men; and provision was made for the enforcement of its penalty by the institution of civil government. The covenant with Noah was a recognition of the race being reconciled to God in its new head, and therefore suited to be treated as a party at peace with God, and to enter on terms of communion with him. Its promise of security from destruction by a flood was a pledge of all greater and after blessings which naturally flow from amity with God.

Thus, we perceive that the revelation of God to the antediluvian world was confirmed in many respects, and enlarged in others, by that made to the postdiluvians. The stupendous events of the deluge were a marvelous confirmation of the justice and mercy of God revealed to Adam. The preaching of Noah was a new mode of urging the truths of God on the minds of men, now somewhat exercised in reflective thought. The distinction of clean and unclean enforced the distinction that really exists between the godly and the ungodly. The prohibition of shedding human blood is the growth of a specific law out of the great principle of moral rectitude in the conscience, apace with the development of evil in the conduct of mankind. The covenant with Noah is the evolution into articulate utterance of that federal relation which was virtually formed with believing and repentant Adam. Adam himself was long silent in the depth of his self-abasement for the disobedience he had exhibited. In Noah the spirit of adoption had attained to liberty of speech, and accordingly, God, on the momentous occasion of his coming out of the ark and presenting his propitiatory and eucharistic offering, enters into a covenant of peace with him, assuring him of certain blessings.

There is something especially interesting in this covenant with Noah, as it embraces the whole human race, and is in force to this day. It is as truly a covenant of grace as that with Abraham. It is virtually the same covenant, only in an earlier and less developed form. Being made with Noah, who had found grace in the eyes of the Lord, and added to the former expression of the divine favor to man, it explicitly mentions a benefit which is merely the first and most palpable of the series of benefits, temporal and eternal, flowing from the grace of God, all of which are in due time made over to the heirs of salvation. We cannot tell how many of the Gentiles explicitly or implicitly consented to this general covenant and partook of its blessings. But it is only just to the God of Noah to be thankful that there was and is an offer of mercy to the whole family of man, all who accept of which are partakers of his grace, and that all subsequent covenants only help to the ultimate and universal acceptance of that fundamental covenant which, though violated by Adam and all his ordinary descendants, was yet in the fullness of time to be implemented by him who became the seed of the woman and the second Adam.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Gen 11:1-3

Of one language

Gods gift of speech

1.

Language or speech God hath allowed to men as men.

2. One language did God vouchsafe to all for good. It was mainly to keep them to the Church.

3. Sin perverts the sweet blessing of one speech to conspiracy against God (Gen 11:9). (G. Hughes, B. D.)

Two kinds of unanimity

Men may do wrong things unanimously, as well as things that are right. We must distinguish between union and conspiracy; we must distinguish between identity and mere association for a given object. Twelve directors may be of one language and of one speech, but the meaning of their unity may be self-enrichment, at the expense of unsuspecting men, who have put their little all into their keeping and direction. It is nothing, therefore, to talk about unanimity in itself considered. We must, in all these things, put the moral question, What is the unanimity about? Is this unanimity moving in the right direction? If it be in a wrong direction, then unanimity is an aggravation of sin; if it be in a right direction, then union is power, and one-heartedness is triumph. But it is possible that unanimity may be but another word for stagnation. There are words in our language which are greatly misunderstood, and unanimity is one of them; peace is another. When many persons say peace, what do they mean? A living, intelligent, active cooperation, where there is mutual concession, where there is courtesy on every hand, where there is independent conviction, and yet noble concert in life? Not at all. They say that a Church is unanimous, and a Church is at peace, when a correct interpreter would say it was the unanimity of the grave, the peace of death. So I put in a word here of caution and of explanation: The whole earth was of one language and of one speech; here is a point of unanimity, and yet there is a unanimous movement in a wrong direction. (J. Parker, D. D.)

One language and one speech

What that language was it is not necessary on the present occasion to examine. The arguments are very strong that it was Hebrew. But the fact that all men did use the same tongue, and the way in which the fact is recorded, lead us to infer that there was something much more than identity of dialect. For we all well know how language is connected with thought and feelings, and how our words react and determine our feelings. So that a oneness of expression will go a great way to produce oneness of soul. Have we not all proved its effect to unite and bind us one with another? Is not that the charm of the familiar language of co-patriots in foreign lands? Is not this one of the secrets of the bliss of song? So that a real and perfectly one language and one speech might be expected to have a most united result on the minds of all who used it, and a most favourable influence on the spirit of true religion. But it is a thing which now is not. No one country has it within itself. No two persons that ever meet have it. It is a lost thing. There is not, truly, upon this earth, in any fraction of it, one language and one speech; and hence a very great part of our sin and our misery! And even if there were a language perfectly the same, yet until there was a setting to rights of disorders which have come into human thought, and until minds were themselves set in one accord, there could not be unity. So that, indeed, there must be something which belongs to a higher dispensation than this. For if the thoughts were disordered, they would themselves give disordered senses to the words spoken. And remember one other thing. In that age, it was not so long after the flood, nor had people been so divided, nor truth so lapsed, but that all must have known the faith of the one true God. And, therefore, their worship must have been one, the same thoughts and the same expressions going up to the same God everywhere. But the world was evidently not yet ripe for unity. Unity is a beautiful flower, but it can only grow in its own proper soil. Then the Fall cropped up, and at once poisoned human nature. They could not use even their one language or their one mind without its unity becoming sin. So they took occasion, by their very oneness, to determine to do two things, which real unity never does. They resolved to make a great monument to their own glory, and they thought to frustrate an original law of God and to break a positive rule of our being. For the primary principle of all religion is that we should seek first the glory of our Maker. Therefore God breathed upon their work, and it was crushed. It was a false unity. They sought their own praise, and it ran contrary to the mind of God. And God Himself at once traced the sin to that root–an unhallowed and unsanctified oneness of mind and language; and God proceeded to punish them in that very thing which they thus misused, and to take away from them that privilege and blessing for which man was not yet educated and prepared. So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth. Said I not right they were not ripe for this precious gift–the omnipotence of unity? Generations must pass; new eras must unfold; Christ must come down and suffer; the Holy Spirit dwell amongst us; the Church must live and work; missionaries must preach; martyrs must die; the whole earth must be regenerate before men could hear their own, their higher, their destined unity. And so the unity, the profane unity, was dashed into hundreds of divergent atoms, and was carried by the four winds to the four corners of the earth. And what was the consequence of this judicial scattering, and this division of the human race which began on the plains of Shinar, and has been increasing ever since, and which we see all around us now? God never does a work, how purative soever it may be, in which there is not a mercy and some purpose or another. Doubtless this scattering of the early post-diluvians carried the knowledge of the true God and of the one faith into all the lands whither they went, even as the early Christians, when they fled from Jerusalem, bore the seed of the gospel into every land. And that knowledge, diluted, indeed, and marred, would go down from generation to generation; and hence, perhaps, the fact–the remarkable fact–that there is no instance in the history of the whole earth of a people, even in the remotest islands of the Pacific, who had not some vestige of the knowledge and worship of a god. And once more there was a plea for prayer, an argument for hope, a pledge of promise–We were all one once, Lord. Thou didst scatter us. Bring back again Thine own image. Give us, give the whole earth, its unity again. I will not now speak of the evil results of that broken language and these severed interests of the family of man. They are too large and too patent to be catalogued here. I will proceed with the unfolding, as it seems to me, of Gods great means for the restitution of unity. From that moment God has steadily, progressively, uniformly carried on His great design to restore the unity which man then fulfilled. Just as He set Himself at once to give back the lost paradise–a better than the first was–has He graciously worked in His working to repair, and much more than repair, the fractured oneness. It became necessary by this dispersion that God should select one family and one race which He should make a special and secure depository of His one truth. Otherwise probably the truth, split and scattered, would not have survived in the earth. And therefore the next fact in history is the call of Abraham. And when God elected Abraham and his descendants to be the stewards of revelation, it was for this very end–that truth might continue one in the world. But in that act of electing grace God did not choose Abraham only, but in Abraham that Seed which was to gather together not only all truth, but all people into Himself. Accordingly, in the fulness of time Christ came. And by His life, death, resurrection, and ascension He became the Head into which all members–thousands and millions of members–were to be gathered and united, and so to make a oneness–oh! how different from all before! how glorious! how entire!–the oneness of one body and one life, the oneness of God. To give effect to, to supplement and complete that unity, the Holy Ghost came as at Pentecost. And at once–mark the fact–He dealt with language, that lost gift–the one language and the one speech; language, doubtless a gift to man at the creation, but now how much more better a gift by the redemption. So it came to pass that the gulf of separation–unknown speech–that great gulf of separation, was, at that moment, taken away. But it was not only in tongue and in speech that they assimilate, but in mind and heart. For the theme and interest of all are one–We do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of God. Observe, then, the effects. At that moment all the Church was really and truly of one heart and one soul; and that union expressed itself in the gift of speech which made all language one. So that the unity was the same, only greater and purer than that before judgment fell upon Babel. And why was it, why was it at Pentecost? It was a beautiful thing, but it did not last. It was a bright rift in the cloud of separation. Why was it, and why did some retain the power of language while in the Church by the gift of tongues, why was it? I have no doubt in my own mind that it was the first drop in the shower–a pledge of what is to be. And will it not one day come–one pure language on the whole earth, one worship, and one service with one consent? But this, I conceive, is the order: First, the body of Christ made one, made one by the individual embodiment into Him of each one of His elect, in His own proper season. Then the mind, made one by the indwelling and inworking of the same Holy Spirit. And then the language, made one by some infusion of the power of the Holy Ghost in the latter days. You have read, perhaps, of two heathen men of different countries, both converted, who met, but could not understand each others speech, when one by chance or providence said Hallelujah, and the other, taking up the formulary, said Amen. And they ran into each others arms. The story may be true or not, but it is a pretty allegory, and a true type of what I believe shall one day be. (J. Vaughan, M. A.)

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell

CHAPTER XI

All the inhabitants of the earth, speaking one language

and dwelling in one place, 1, 2,

purpose to build a city and a tower to prevent their

dispersion, 3, 4.

God confounds their language, and scatters them over

the whole earth, 5-9.

Account of the lives and families of the postdiluvian patriarchs.

Shem, 10, 11.

Arphaxad, 12, 13.

Salah, 14, 15.

Eber, 16, 17.

Peleg, 18,19.

Ragau or Reu, 20, 21.

Serug, 22, 23.

Nahor, 24, 25.

Terah and his three sons, Haran, Nahor, and Abram, 26, 27.

The death of Haran, 28.

Abram marries Sarai, and Nahor marries Milcah, 29.

Sarai is barren, 30.

Terah, Abram, Sarai, and Lot, leave Ur of the Chaldees,

and go to Haran, 31.

Terah dies in Haran, aged two hundred and five years, 32.

NOTES ON CHAP. XI

Verse 1. The whole earth was of one language] The whole earth – all mankind was of one language, in all likelihood the HEBREW; and of one speech – articulating the same words in the same way. It is generally supposed, that after the confusion mentioned in this chapter, the Hebrew language remained in the family of Heber. The proper names, and their significations given in the Scripture, seem incontestable evidences that the Hebrew language was the original language of the earth-the language in which God spake to man, and in which he gave the revelation of his will to Moses and the prophets. “It was used,” says Mr. Ainsworth, “in all the world for one thousand seven hundred and fifty-seven years, till Phaleg, the son of Heber, was born, and the tower of Babel was in building one hundred years after the flood, Ge 10:25; Ge 11:9. After this, it was used among the Hebrews or Jews, called therefore the Jews’ language, Isa 36:11, until they were carried captive into Babylon, where the holy tongue ceased from being commonly used, and the mixed Hebrew (or Chaldee) came in its place.” It cannot be reasonably imagined that the Jews lost the Hebrew tongue entirely in the seventy years of their captivity in Babylon; yet, as they were mixed with the Chaldeans, their children would of course learn that dialect, and to them the pure Hebrew would be unintelligible; and this probably gave rise to the necessity of explaining the Hebrew Scriptures in the Chaldee tongue, that the children might understand as well as their fathers. As we may safely presume the parents could not have forgotten the Hebrew, so we may conclude the children in general could not have learned it, as they did not live in an insulated state, but were mixed with the Babylonians. This conjecture removes the difficulty with which many have been embarrassed; one party supposing that the knowledge of the Hebrew language was lost during the Babylonish captivity, and hence the necessity of the Chaldee Targums to explain the Scriptures; another party insisting that this was impossible in so short a period as seventy years.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Earth is oft put for its inhabitants, as Gen 6:21; 1Ch 16:23; Psa 33:8.

Of one speech, which even heathen writers acknowledge; and that probably was the Hebrew tongue.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

1. the whole earth was of onelanguage. The descendants of Noah, united by the strong bond of acommon language, had not separated, and notwithstanding the divinecommand to replenish the earth, were unwilling to separate. The morepious and well-disposed would of course obey the divine will; but anumerous body, seemingly the aggressive horde mentioned (Ge10:10), determined to please themselves by occupying the fairestregion they came to.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech,…. Or had been w, before the flood, and from that time to this, and still was, until the confusion took place; the account of which, and the occasion of it, are given in this chapter: by the whole earth is meant the inhabitants of it, see Isa 37:18 and so the Jerusalem Targum paraphrases the words,

“and all the generations of the earth were of one language, and of one speech, and of one counsel, for they spoke in the holy tongue in which the world was created at the beginning;”

and to the same purpose the Targum of Jonathan: all the posterity of Shem, Ham, and Japheth, used the same language, though it does not appear that they were all in one counsel or consultation, or of one mind about building a city or tower, which the Targum seems to suggest; for it is not likely that Shem and his sons were in it: nor by “one lip” and “the same words or things” x, as these phrases may be rendered, are we to understand the same simplicity of speech and business, and likeness of manners; for it appears there was a difference with respect to these in the immediate sons of Noah, and it may be supposed to be much more in their remote offspring; nor as if they were all of the same religion, embraced the same doctrines, and spoke the same things; for as idolatry and superstition obtained in the race of Cain before the flood, so Ham and his posterity soon fell into the same, or the like, afterwards: and it may be observed that the same distinction was made of the children of God, and of the children of men, before the confusion and dispersion, as was before the flood,

Ge 11:5 from whence it appears they were not in the same sentiments and practice of religion: but this is to be understood of one and the same language, without any diversity of dialects, or without any hard and strange words, not easily understood; and perhaps it was pronounced by the lip and other instruments of speech in the same way; so that there was no difficulty in understanding one another, men, women, and children, all the people in common, princes and peasants, wise and unwise, all spoke the same language and used the same words; and this the Targumists take to be the holy or Hebrew language; and so Jarchi and Aben Ezra, and the Jewish writers in general, and most Christians; though some make a question of it, whether it might not be rather the Syriac, or Chaldee, or Arabic; but there is no need of such a question, since these with the Hebrew are all one and the same language; and no doubt it was the eastern language, without giving it any other name, which now subsists in the above dialects, though not in anyone alone, which was first spoken; though more purely and without the difference of dialects it now consists of, or without the various different inflexions now made in it; for nothing is more reasonable to suppose, than that the language Adam spoke was used by Noah, since Adam lived within one hundred years and a little more of the birth of Noah; and it is not to be questioned but Noah’s sons spoke the same language as he did, and their posterity now, which was but little more than one hundred years after the flood: there are various testimonies of Heathens confirming this truth, that originally men spoke but one language; thus Sibylla in Josephus y, who says,

“when all men were , of the same language, some began to build a most high tower, c.”

so Abydenus z an Heathen historian, speaking of the building of the tower of Babel, says,

“at that time men were , of the same tongue”

in like manner Hyginus a, speaking of Phoroneus, the first of mortals, that reigned, says,

“many ages before, men lived without towns and laws, “una lirgua loquentes”, speaking one language, under the empire of Jove.”

w “et fuerat”, Junius Tremellius, Piscator “caeterum fuit olim”, Schmidt. x “unum labium et verba eadem”, Schmidt; “Labii unius et sermonum eorundem, vel rerum”, Clarius. y Antiqu. l. 1. c. 4. sect. 3. z Apud Euseb. Evangel. Praepar. l. 9. c. 14. p. 416. a Fabulae, Fab. 143.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

“ And the whole earth (i.e., the population of the earth, vid., Gen 2:19) was one lip and one kind of words: ” unius labii eorundemque verborum . The unity of language of the whole human race follows from the unity of its descent from one human pair (vid., Gen 2:22). But as the origin and formation of the races of mankind are beyond the limits of empirical research, so no philology will ever be able to prove or deduce the original unity of human speech from the languages which have been historically preserved, however far comparative grammar may proceed in establishing the genealogical relation of the languages of different nations.

Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament

The Confusion of Tongues.

B. C. 2247.

      1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.   2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.   3 And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar.   4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

      The close of the foregoing chapter tells us that by the sons of Noah, or among the sons of Noah, the nations were divided in the earth after the flood, that is, were distinguished into several tribes or colonies; and, the places having grown too strait for them, it was either appointed by Noah, or agreed upon among his sons, which way each several tribe or colony should steer its course, beginning with the countries that were next them, and designing to proceed further and further, and to remove to a greater distance from each other, as the increase of their several companies should require. Thus was the matter well settled, one hundred years after the flood, about the time of Peleg’s birth; but the sons of men, it should seem, were loth to disperse into distant places; they thought the more the merrier and the safer, and therefore they contrived to keep together, and were slack to go to possess the land which the Lord God of their fathers had given them (Josh. xviii. 3), thinking themselves wiser than either God or Noah. Now here we have,

      I. The advantages which befriended their design of keeping together, 1. They were all of one language, v. 1. If there were any different languages before the flood, yet Noah’s only, which it is likely was the same with Adam’s, was preserved through the flood, and continued after it. Now, while they all understood one another, they would be the more likely to love one another, and the more capable of helping one another, and the less inclinable to separate one from another. 2. They found a very convenient commodious place to settle in (v. 2), a plain in the land of Shinar, a spacious plain, able to contain them all, and a fruitful plain, able, according as their present numbers were, to support them all, though perhaps they had not considered what room there would be for them when their numbers should be increased. Note, Inviting accommodations, for the present, often prove too strong temptations to the neglect of both duty and interest, as it respects futurity.

      II. The method they took to bind themselves to one another, and to settle together in one body. Instead of coveting to enlarge their borders by a peaceful departure under the divine protection, they contrived to fortify them, and, as those that were resolved to wage war with Heaven, they put themselves into a posture of defence. Their unanimous resolution is, Let us build ourselves a city and a tower. It is observable that the first builders of cities, both in the old world (ch. iv. 17), and in the new world here, were not men of the best character and reputation: tents served God’s subjects to dwell in; cities were first built by those that were rebels against him and revolters from him. Observe here,

      1. How they excited and encouraged one another to set about this work. They said, Go to, let us make brick (v. 3), and again, (v. 4), Go to, let us build ourselves a city; by mutual excitements they made one another more daring and resolute. Note, Great things may be brought to pass when the undertakers are numerous and unanimous, and stir up one another. Let us learn to provoke one another to love and to good works, as sinners stir up and encourage one another to wicked works. See Psa 122:1; Isa 2:3; Isa 2:5; Jer 50:5.

      2. What materials they used in their building. The country, being plain, yielded neither stone nor mortar, yet this did not discourage them from their undertaking, but they made brick to serve instead of stone, and slime or pitch instead of mortar. See here, (1.) What shift those will make that are resolute in their purposes: were we but zealously affected in a good thing, we should not stop our work so often as we do, under pretence that we want conveniences for carrying it on. (2.) What a difference there is between men’s building and God’s; when men build their Babel, brick and slime are their best materials; but, when God builds his Jerusalem, he lays even the foundations of it with sapphires, and all its borders with pleasant stones,Isa 54:11-12; Rev 21:19.

      3. For what ends they built. Some think they intended hereby to secure themselves against the waters of another flood. God had told them indeed that he would not again drown the world; but they would trust to a tower of their own making, rather than to a promise of God’s making or an ark of his appointing. If, however, they had had this in their eye, they would have chosen to build their tower upon a mountain rather than upon a plain, but three things, it seems, they aimed at in building this tower:–

      (1.) It seems designed for an affront to God himself; for they would build a tower whose top might reach to heaven, which bespeaks a defiance of God, or at least a rivalship with him. They would be like the Most High, or would come as near him as they could, not in holiness but in height. They forgot their place, and, scorning to creep on the earth, resolved to climb to heaven, not by the door or ladder, but some other way.

      (2.) They hoped hereby to make themselves a name; they would do something to be talked of now, and to give posterity to know that there had been such men as they in the world. Rather than die and leave no memorandum behind them, they would leave this monument of their pride, and ambition, and folly. Note, [1.] Affectation of honour and a name among men commonly inspires with a strange ardour for great and difficult undertakings, and often betrays to that which is evil and offensive to God. [2.] It is just with God to bury those names in the dust which are raised by sin. These Babel-builders put themselves to a great deal of foolish expense to make themselves a name; but they could not gain even this point, for we do not find in any history the name of so much as one of these Babel-builders. Philo Judus says, They engraved every one his name upon a brick, in perpetuam rei memoriam–as a perpetual memorial; yet neither did this serve their purpose.

      (3.) They did it to prevent their dispersion: Lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth. “It was done” (says Josephus) “in disobedience to that command (ch. ix. 1), Replenish the earth.” God orders them to disperse. “No,” say they, “we will not, we will live and die together.” In order hereunto, they engage themselves and one another in this vast undertaking. That they might unite in one glorious empire, they resolve to build this city and tower, to be the metropolis of their kingdom and the centre of their unity. It is probable that the band of ambitious Nimrod was in all this. He could not content himself with the command of a particular colony, but aimed at universal monarchy, in order to which, under pretence of uniting for their common safety, he contrives to keep them in one body, that, having them all under his eye, he might not fail to have them under his power. See the daring presumption of these sinners. Here is, [1.] A bold opposition to God: “You shall be scattered,” says God. “But we will not,” say they. Woe unto him that thus strives with his Maker. [2.] A bold competition with God. It is God’s prerogative to be universal monarch, Lord of all, and King of kings; the man that aims at it offers to step into the throne of God, who will not give his glory to another.

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary

GENESIS – CHAPTER ELEVEN

Verses 1-9:

The original language of earth’s population, following the Deluge, was one. Rabbinical tradition defines this language as Hebrew. Many scholars regard this as unknown. Neither the Scriptures nor secular history reveal what the original language was.

There was a general population shift from the mountains region of Armenia where the ark landed, to the west and the plains of Shinar, later known as Babylon. Both the topography and the climate made life easier than the rugged hill country which they left. How long they lived there before they devised the plan to build a “tower” is unknown. Some suggest it was during the lifetime of Nimrod, that he led in its building. If so, it was during the third generation following the flood.

Life after the flood followed much the same course as life before the flood: rebellion against Jehovah. God instructed Noah’s descendants to disperse over the earth and fill it with their offspring. Man said, “Let’s stay in a close-knit society, and not be

scattered.” They devised a means to this end.

The alluvial plain of Babylon was devoid of stone, but filled with rich deposits of clay. Men formed bricks from this clay, and “burned” them, or fired them in a kiln. For mortar they used “slime,” chamar, or bitumen (Septuagint asphaltos). Bitumen boils up from subterranean deposits like hot pitch or oil in this area.

Ordinarily bricks were sun-dried, and tended after a time to disintegrate. Fired bricks were quite durable. And joined by mortar of water-proof tar they furnished a long-lasting structure. The men of that day purposed to use these materials to build a world-capital city. The outstanding feature of that city was to be a “tower,” a “name,” shem, or monument, to man’s ingenuity. Their purpose was not to use the tower as a staircase to heaven. It was likely to be a temple dedicated to the “powers” or signs of heaven as represented by the zodiac.

Jehovah took note of these plans. “To see” denotes seeing with a view to judicial action. “The children of men” is bene ha adam, the “sons of Adam.” This implies the effort was universal, including the Semitic people as well as Hamitic and Japhetic. God’s investigation showed mankind united in one race, one tongue, and one purpose. They were united in effort, and were enjoying success in their efforts. In His wisdom God determined that if the people were allowed to succeed in this project, they would progress to yet other and greater areas of defiance. So, He determined to thwart their purpose and make it impossible to continue their unified efforts. He made it impossible for the workers to understand each other. “Confound” is balal, “to mix or mingle.” The Greek word is suncheo, and occurs also in Ac 21:27. It denotes the babbling of sounds produced by various languages being spoken at the same time. The text does not denote that each individual spoke in a different “tongue” or language. It refers to families or nations, with each having its own tongue.

The confusion of tongues effectively halted the work on the tower, before it could be completed. The people went their way, scattered according to the various languages they spoke. This marked the end of man’s unified effort of rebellion. It is possible that the Babylonians, or those who remained in that area, completed the city and perhaps even the tower itself.

“Babel” became the name of the city. The word is from balal, the term God used to denote the confusion of the languages. Both the ancient Babylonian and Assyrian histories record their “legend” of the tower, in which the “gods” became angry with presumptuous men and confounded the builders’ speech. These accounts are borrowed from the tradition preserved by Divine Providence.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

1. And the whole earth was of one language. Whereas mention had before been made of Babylon in a single word, Moses now more largely explains whence it derived its name. For this is a truly memorable history, in which we may perceive the greatness of men’s obstinacy against God, and the little profit they receive from his judgments. And although at first sight the atrocity of the evil does not appear; yet the punishment which follows it, testifies how highly God was displeased with that which these men attempted. They who conjecture that the tower was built with the intent that is should prove a refuge and protections if, at any time, God should determine to overwhelm the earth with a deluge, have no other guide, that I can see, but the dream of their own brain. For the words of Moses signify no such thing: nothing, indeed, is here noticed, except their mad ambitions and proud contempt of God. ‘Let us build a tower (they say) whose top may reach to heaven, and let us get ourselves a name.’ We see the design and the aim of the undertaking. For whatsoever might happen, they wish to have an immortal name on earth; and thus they build, as if in opposition to the will of God. And doubtless ambition not only does injury to men, but exalts itself even against God. To erect a citadel was not in itself so great a crime; but to raise an eternal monument to themselves, which might endure throughout all ages, was a proof of headstrong pride, joined with contempt of God. And hence originated the fable of the giants who, as the poets have feigned, heaped mountains upon mountains, in order to drag down Jove from his celestial throne. This allegory is not very remote from the impious counsel to which Moses alludes; for as soon as mortals, forgetful of themselves; are inflated above measure, it is certain that like the giants, they wage war with God. This they do not openly profess, yet it cannot be otherwise than that every one who transgresses his prescribed bounds, makes a direct attack upon God.

With respect to the time in which this event happened, a fragment of Berosus is extant, (if, indeed, Berosus is to be accounted the author of such trifles,) where, among other things, a hundred and thirty years are reckoned from the deluge to the time when they began to build the tower. This opinion, though deficient in competent authority, has been preferred, by some, to that which commonly obtained among the Jews, and which places about three hundred and forty years between the deluge and the building of the tower. Nor is there anything more plausible in what others relate; namely, that these builders undertook the work, because men were even then dispersed far and wide, and many colonies were already formed; whence they apprehended that as their offspring was daily increasing, they must, in a short time, migrate to a still greater distance. But to this argument we may oppose the fact, that the peculiar blessing of God was to be traced in this multiplication of mankind. Moreover, Moses seems to set aside all controversy. For after he has mentioned Arphaxad as the third of the sons of Shem, he then names Peleg, his great-grandson, in whose days the languages were divided. But from a computation of the years which he sets down, it plainly appears that one century only intervened. It is, however, to be noted, that the languages are not said to have been divided immediately after the birth of Peleg, and that no definite time was ever specified. (321) It must, indeed, have added greatly to the weight of Noah’s sufferings, when he heard of this wicked counsel, which had been taken by his posterity. And it is not to be doubted that he was wounded with the deepest grief, when he beheld them, with devoted minds, rushing to their own destruction. But the Lord thus exercised the holy man, even in extreme old age, to teach us not to be discouraged by a continual succession of conflicts. If any one should prefer the opinion commonly received among the Jews; the division of the earth must be referred to the first transmigrations, when men began to be distributed in various regions: but what has been already recorded in the preceding chapter, respecting the monarchy of Nimrod, is repugnant to this interpretation. (322) Still a middle opinion may be entertained; namely, that the confusion of tongues may perhaps have happened in the extreme old age of Peleg. Now he lived nearly two hundred and forty years; nor will it be absurd to suppose that the empire founded by Nimrod endured two or three centuries. I certainly, — as in a doubtful case, — freely admit that a longer space of time might intervene between the deluge and the design of building the tower. Moreover, when Moses says, ‘the earth was of one lip,’ he commends the peculiar kindness of God, in having willed that the sacred bond of society among men far separated from each other should be retained, by their possessing a common language among themselves. And truly the diversity of tongues is to be regarded as a prodigy. For since language is the impress of the mind, (323) how does it come to pass, that men, who are partakers of the same reason, and who are born for social life, do not communicate with each other in the same language? This defect, therefore, seeing that it is repugnant to nature, Moses declares to be adventitious; and pronounces the division of tongues to be a punishment, divinely inflicted upon men, because they impiously conspired against God. Community of language ought to have promoted among them consent in religion; but this multitude of whom Moses speaks, after they had alienated themselves from the pure worship of God, and the sacred assembly of the faithful, coalesce to excite war against God. Therefore by the just vengeance of God their tongues were divided.

(321) Yet as the name פלג, ( Peleg,) signifies division, the probability is that the division took place about the date of his birth, and that the name was given him by his parents in consequence of that event. Now it appears that Peleg was born in the hundred and first year after the flood; see verses Gen 6:11. This, therefore, seems to set aside Calvin’s calculations, doubtingly expressed, respecting the more recent date of the confusion of tongues. — Ed

(322) There is no repugnance, if it be admitted that the monarchy of Nimrod is mentioned by anticipation in the former chapter, in order that the course of the narrative might not be interrupted by a detail of the particulars of the confusion of Babel. And then, there is no need for the middle opinion which the Author proceeds to state, and which is encumbered with many difficulties. We may easily conceive that the Sacred Writer goes back, in the present chapter, to give a detailed account of events, which had been only slightly referred to, or altogether omitted in the preceding portion of the narrative. — Ed.

(323) “ Nam quum mentis character sit lingua.” The word character means the impression made by a seal upon wax, and the allusion here is a very striking one, though the force of it is not adequately conveyed by the term impress. The term in Greek is applied to Christ, and is there translated “express image.” See Heb 1:3. — Ed

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

THE DAWN OF HISTORY

Gen 1:1 to Gen 11:9.

IN beginning this Bible of the Expositor and Evangelist, I am keenly sensible of the seriousness of my task. The book to be treated is the Book of Books, the one and only volume that has both survived and increasingly conquered the centuries, and that now, in a hoary old age, shows no sign of weakness, holds no hint of decay or even decrepitude; in fact, the Book is more robust at this moment than at any time since it came to completion, and it gives promise of dominating the future in a measure far surpassing its influence upon the past.

The method of studying the Bible, to be illustrated in these pages, is, we are convinced, a sane and safe one, if not the most efficient one. Years since, certain statements from the pen of Dr. James M. Gray, superintendent of the Moody Bible Institute, fell under our eyes, and those statements have profoundly influenced our methods of study.

Five simple rules he suggested for mastering the English Bible:

First, Read the Book.

Second: Read it consecutively.

Third: Read it repeatedly.

Fourth: Read it independently.

Fifth: Read it prayerfully.

Applying these suggestions to each volume in turn, if ones life be long continued, he may not hope to master his English Bible, but he will certainly discover its riches increasingly, and possess himself more and more of its marvelous treasures,

It was on the first Sunday of July, 1922, that I placed before myself and my people the program of study that produced these volumes. To be sure, much of the work had been done back of that date, but the determination to utilize it in this exact manner was fully adopted there and then. It was and is my thought that the greatest single weakness of the present-day pulpit exists in the circumstance that we have departed from the custom of our best fathers in the ministry, namely, Scriptural exposition. If, therefore, these volumes shall lead a large number of my brethren in the ministry, particularly the young men among them, to become expository preachers, and yet to combine exposition with evangelism, my reward will be my eternal riches.

Stimulated by that high hope, I turn your attention to the study itself, and begin where the Book begins and where all true students should begin, with Gen 1:1, but in thought, an eternity beyond the hour of its phrasing, for by the opening sentence we are pushed back to God. In the beginning

GOD.

That is the starting point of all true studies. The scientist is compelled to start there, or else he never understands where he is, nor yet with what he deals. God, the One of infinite wisdom, infinite power, infinite justice and of infinite goodnessIn the beginning God.

Having heard that name and having understood the One to whom it is applied, we are prepared for what follows,created the heavens and the earth marvelous first verse of the Bible!

All in this first chapter is wrapped up in that first sentence; that is the explanation of all things; what follows is simply the setting forth of details.

I agree with Joseph Parker that the explanation is simple. No attempt at learned analysis; that the explanation is sublime because it sweeps in all of time, all of material suggestions, all of power and illustrates all of wisdomthe heavens declare the glory of God and the firmament showeth His handiwork; day unto day uttereth speech and night unto night showeth knowledge, and it is a sufficient explanation, the only one that satisfies the mind of man.

Infidel evolutionists cannot account for the beginnings. The geologist who does not believe, digs down to a point where he says, Who started all of this? and waits in sadness while the dumb rocks are silent; but for the Christian student no such mystery makes his work an enigma.

Everywhere he sees the touch of God; in the plants, the animals, the birds and in man,God. Where the unbeliever wonders and questions to get no reply, the believer admires, saying, This is my Fathers hand, the work of my Fathers word. Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the Word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear (Heb 11:3), and he joins with the Psalmist, Let all nations praise the name of the Lord for He commanded and they were created (Psa 108:5).

Competent scholars have called attention to the careful use of words in the Bible, a use so painstaking and perfect as to give a scientific demonstration of the verbal inspiration theory. When it is said that God created the heavens and the earth, the Hebrew verb bara is employed, and it means to create something from nothing, so that God gave the death blow to the evolution theory some thousands of years before that unprovable hypothesis was born! The same word bara is also used in the 21st verse (Gen 1:21) concerning the creation of mammals, and three times in the 27th verse (Gen 1:27) concerning the creation of man, while a kindred word asah (neither of which convey any such thought as growth or evolution) is employed concerning His making man in His own image in Gen 1:26.

God, then, is not a mechanic; He is a Creator. He did not come upon the scenes of the universe to fashion what existed independent and apart from Him, but to create and complete according to His own pleasure.

In later chapters we shall show how these creative acts are confirmed by science itself, and argue the utter folly of trying to find incompatibility between Gods Work and Gods Word.

So for the present we may pass from God the Creator, as revealed in the first chapter, to

ADAM THE MAN

of the second chapter. An infinite decline, somebody says. But let us be reminded that it is not so great as appears at this present hour. The only man God ever made outright was not what you and I see now. The man He made was in His own image, after His own likeness, only as far below

Him as the finite is below the infinite; as the best creation is below the best Creator.

The man God made was good. The man God made was great. The man God made was wise. The man God made was holy. The men we see now are not His children, but the children of the fallen Adam instead, for Eve, fallen, brought forth after her kind; and what a fall was that!

When man disobeyed, he brought on himself and all succeeding ages sin, and its wretched results. There are those who blame God for the fall of man and say, He had no business to make him so he could fall. But everything that is upright can fall, and the difference between a man who could not fall and a man who could fall is simply the difference between a machine and a sentient, intelligent, upright, capable being.

There was but a single point at which this man could oppose Providence. Situated and environed as Adam was, the great social sins that have crushed the race could make no appeal to him. It is commonly conceded that the Decalogue sweeps the gamut of social, ethical and even religious conduct. Adam had no occasion to bow down before another God, for Jehovah, his Creator, was his counsellor and friend, and of other gods he knew nothing nor had he need of such. There was no provocation that could tempt him to take the name of that God in vain. There was no Sabbath day, for all days were holy, and the condemnation to labor was not yet passed. There was no father and mother to be honored. To have committed murder was unthinkable; first because there was no provocation, and second, such an act would have left him in the world alone, his heart craving, unsatisfied, and his very kind to perish. The seventh commandment meant nothing to the man whose wife was in the image of God, and the only woman known. Theft was impossible, since all things belonged to him. False witness and covetousness against a neighborhe had no neighbor.

But when God selected for Himself a single tree, leaving the rest of the earth to Adam, and he proved himself unwilling to let the least of earthly possessions be wholly the Lords, he gave an illustration to the unborn millenniums that man, in his almost infinite greatness, would not abide content that God Himself should be over and above him; and from that moment until this, that very thing has been the crux of every contention between the Divine and the human. If we may believe the Prophets, it was that very temptation that caused Lucifers fall and gave us the devil and hell!

All talk of shallow minds that God condemned the race because one man happened to bite into an apple, is utterly wide of the mark. Condemnation rests upon the race because every man born of the flesh has revealed the same spirit of rebellion shown by our first parentswe will not have God rule over us even to the extent of keeping anything from us. The wealth of His gifts should shame and restrain against His few prohibitions.

But, alas for mans guilt and godlessness! Equally wide of the mark is that other superficial reasoning that it is unjust of God to condemn me because some one of my forefathers misbehaved! Why charge God with injustice concerning something He has never done and will never do? Why not let

Him speak for Himself in such matters, and listen when he declares, The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him (Eze 18:20).

If, therefore, Adam with a body, mind and spirit unsullied, never having been weakened by an evil act or habit, did not stand, what hope for any man in his own merit. Are we better than they? No, in no wise, for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles that we are all under sin. As it is written, There is none righteous, no not one. There is none that understandeth. There is none that seeketh after God. They are all gone out of the way. They are altogether become unprofitable (Rom 3:9-12).

You say that the temptation was a subtle one. I answer, Yes, that is Satans way to this hour. You say, The desire was for wisdom. I answer, Yes, that is still Satans appeal; you need to see and to know more than you do, hence you had better try this sin.

Over one of the most palatial but wicked doorways of all Paris there used to be an inscription, Come in; nothing to pay, and so far as mere entrance to that place was concerned, that was true. But those who entered found when they had come out that they had visited the place at the cost of character, not to speak of that meaner thing money.

In passing, we call your attention to the justice of Gods judgment upon this sin. Its heaviest sentence fell upon the serpent, Satans direct agent; that wisest of all beasts of the field. He was accursed above all cattle, and brought down from his upright, manly-appearing position to go upon his belly and to eat dust all his days, and to be hated and killed by the seed of the woman with whom he had had such influence.

The second sentence in weight fell upon the woman who listened to this deception and led the way in disobedience. The man did not escape. The associate in sin never does. His love for the principal may in some measure mitigate Gods judgment, but the justice of God would be called in question, and even His goodness, if He permitted any sin to be unpunished.

EVE, THE PRINCIPAL PERSON

in this third chapter must have been in her unfallen state Adams equal, mentally and morally. We have had great women, beautiful women, women worthy the admiration of the world, but I have an idea that the worlds greatest woman was not Cleopatra, the beautiful but selfish; nor Paula, that firmest of all friends; nor Heloise, the very embodiment of affection; nor Joan or Arc, heroism incarnate; nor Elizabeth, the wonderful queen; nor Madam De Stael of letters; nor Hannah Moore of education; but Eve, our first mother.

When I think on her and look at the frail, feeble, sickly, sinful sister of the streets, I feel like weeping over the fact that our first mother fell; and today among her daughters are those so far removed from Gods ideal.

THE FAMILY

of the fourth chapter had its beginning in sin, and it is a dreadfully dark picture that is here presented. Envy, murder and lust appear at once. Abel is murdered, Cain made a criminal, polygamy introduced and all social vices which curse the sons of God. The picture would incite despair, but for the circumstance that in the third chapter God had made a promise which put Grace instead of Law.

There was need, for unless the womans seed should bruise the serpents head, that serpents venom will not only strike the heel of every son, but send its poison coursing to his heart and head; without God, without hopedead indeed!

Truly, as one writer has said, We lose our life when we lose our innocence; we are dead when we are guilty; we are in hell when we are in shame.

Death does not take a long time to come upon us; it comes on the very day of our sin. In the day when thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. Before that sentence there is no hope, except in these words spoken of the seed of woman against that old serpent, Satan; It shall bruise thy head the first prophecy of the wonderful gift of Gods Son.

Of

CAIN AND ABEL

we appreciate the contrast! The self-righteousness on the part of one; self-abasement on the part of the other. Cains saying, The fruit of mine own hands shall suffice for my justification before God; Abel saying, Without the shedding of blood there is no remission, and that spirit of Cain dominates the early society, as we have already seen; for while the population grew rapidly, sin kept pace, and even seemed swifter still. From self-righteousness they rushed to envy, to murder, and to lust.

The Pharisee may thank God that he is not as other men are, but history is likely to demonstrate the want of occasion for his boasting, for pride goeth before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.

The most dangerous man is the man who recognizes no dependence upon another than himself; and the man most likely to be an extortioner, to be unjust, the man most apt to be an adulterer, yea, even a murderer, is this same Cain who says, See the fruit of my hands. The youthful Chicago murderers thought their fine family connections and their university educations would save them from suspicion and condemnation! I tell you, it is the humble man who is justified in Gods sight!

The man who cries, God be merciful to me a sinnerrather than the man who wipes his lips and says, I am clean, and is offended when you talk to him of the necessity of purifying Blood in which to baptize his soulhe is the man who is justified in Gods sight.

THE FIFTH CHAPTER

covers a period of about 1,500 years, and contains but one great name, not introduced in the other chapters, and this is the name of Enoch. Note that his greatness consisted in the single fact that he walked with God.

Dr. Dixon said, He did not try to induce God to walk with him. He simply fell in with Gods ways and work.

Some one asked Abraham Lincoln to appoint a day of fasting and prayer that God might be on the side of the Northern Army. To this that noble President replied, Dont bother about what side God is on. He is on the right side. You simply get with Him.

Enoch was an every-day hero! Walking patiently, persistently, continuously is harder than flying. They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run and not be weary; they shall walk and not faint. Like Enoch of old, they shall not see death, for God shall take them, and before their translation they shall have this testimony that they please God.

We have said that this fifth chapter covers 1,500 years. I call you to note the fact that it contains a multitude of names; names that even the best of Bible students do not, and cannot call. Nobody has ever committed them to memory; nobody cares to. They are not worth it. They were given to no noble deeds; they lived and died. The only wonder we have about them is that God let some of them live so long, unless it be that we also wonder how they managed to live so long and accomplish so little. Yet these nonentities have a part in Gods plan. They were bringing forth children; grandchildren came, and great grandchildren, and the children of great-grandchildren until Enoch was born, and by and by Noah; then the whole line was noble from Seth, Adams better of the living sons, down to these great names. It is worth while for a family to be continued for a thousand years, if, at the end of that time, one son can be born into the house who shall bring things to pass; one Enoch who shall walk with God; one Noah who shall save the race! There are people who are greatly distressed because their parents were neither lords, dukes nor even millionaires. They seem to think that the child who is to come to much must descend from a father of superior reputation at least. History testifies to the contrary, and shows us that the noblest are often born into unknown houses. The most gifted sons, the most wonderful daughters have been bred by parents of whom the great world never heard until these children, by their fame, called attention to their humble fathers.

The multiplied concessions that advocates of the evolution theory are obliged to make by facts they face at every turn, excite almost tender pity for them. Professor Conklin, in his volume The Direction of Human Evolution puts forth an endeavor in splendid defense of this hypothesis worthy of a better cause, and yet again and again he is compelled to say the things that disprove his main proposition. Consider these words. Think of the great men of unknown lineage, and the unknown men of great lineage; think of the close relationship of all persons of the same race; of the wide distribution of good and bad traits in the whole population; of incompetence and even feeble-mindedness in great families, and of genius and greatness in unknown families, and say whether natural inheritance supports the claims of aristocracy or of democracy.

When we remember that most of the great leaders of mankind came of humble parents; that many of the greatest geniuses had the most lowly origin; that Shakespeare was the son of a bankrupt butcher and an ignorant woman who could not write her name, that as a youth he is said to have been known more for poaching than for scholarship, and that his acquaintance with the London theatres began by his holding horses for their patrons; that Beethovens mother was a consumptive, the daughter of a cook, and his father a confirmed drunkard; that Schuberts father was a peasant by birth and his mother a domestic servant; that Faraday, perhaps the greatest scientific discoverer of any age, was born over a stable, his father a poor sick black-smither, his mother an ignorant drudge, and his only education obtained in selling newspapers on the streets of London and later in working as apprentice to a book-binder; that the great Pasteur was the son of a tanner; that Lincolns parents were accounted poor white trash and his early surroundings and education most unpromising; and so on through the long list of names in which democracy glories when we remember these we may well ask whether aristocracy can show a better record. The law of entail is aristocratic, but the law of Mendel is democratic.

Quaint old Thomas Fuller wrote many years ago in his Scripture Observations,

I find, Lord, the genealogy of my Saviour strangely checkered with four remarkable changes in four immediate generations:

1. Roboam begat Abia, that is a bad father and a bad son.

2. Abia begat Asa, that is a bad father a good son.

3. Asa begat Josaphat, that is a good father a good son.

4. Josaphat begat Joram, that is a good father a bad son.

I can see, Lord, from hence that my fathers piety cannot be entailed; that is bad news for me. But I see also that actual impiety is not always hereditary; that is good news for my son.

It is not so much a question as to your birth, or to the line in which you are, as to the nobleness of the family tree, as it is what sort of a branch you are; what sort of a branch you may become.

The Duke of Modena flung a taunt at a Cardinal in a controversy, reminding him that his father was only a swineherd of the Dukes father. The Cardinal calmly replied, If your father had been my fathers swineherd, you would have been a swineherd still.

In the race of life it does not make so much difference where we start as how we end.

I do not mean to despise the laws of heredity. They are somewhat fixed, wise and wonderful. The child of a good father has the better chance in this world, beyond doubt. But our plea is that no matter who the fathers are, we may so live that our offspring shall be named by all succeeding generations. I call attention to Enoch in illustration.

About

NOAH

four chapters or more enwrap themselves. Gods man has a large place in history. It is hard enough for Him to find one who is faithful, but when found He always has an important commission for him.

The most important commission ever given to any man was given to this man; namely, that of saving the race. Noah did his best, but when he saw that he was not succeeding with the outside world, he turned his hope to himself as the last resort; to his family as his possible associates. That is always the last resort. Man must save himself, or he can save no one else. The man who saves himself by letting God save him, stands a good chance of being accepted by his own family, and his faith will doubtless find its answer in their salvation as well. Even if it fail with the outside world, that world will be compelled to remember, when Gods judgment comes, that this commissioned one did what he could for them.

In Hebrews we read, By faith Noah moved with fear prepared an ark to the saving of his house. The fear of man bringeth a snare. The fear of God effects salvation. The fear of man makes a coward; the fear of God incites courage. The fear of man means defeat; the fear of God accomplishes success. Be careful whom you fear! I like the man who can tremble before the Father of all. I pity the man who trembles before the face of every earthly foe.

The story is told that two men were commissioned by Wellington to go on a dangerous errand. As they galloped along, one looked at the other, saying, You are scared. Yes, replied his comrade, I am, but I am still more afraid not to do what the commander said. The first turned his horse and galloped back to the Generals tent and said, Sir, you have sent me with a coward. When I looked at him last his face was livid with fear and his form trembled like a leaf. Well, said Wellington, you had better hurry back to him, or he will have the mission performed before you get there to aid. As the man started back he met his comrade, who said, You need not go. I have performed the mission already.

It was through Noah that the Lord gave to humanity a fresh start. God is always doing that. It is the meaning of every revolutionGod overrules it for a fresh start. That is the meaning of wars they may be Satanic in origin, but God steps in often and uses for a fresh start. That is the meaning of the wiping out of nationsa fresh start, and man is always doing what he did at the firstfalling again.

Noah was a righteous man; with his family he made up the whole company of those who had been loyal to God, and one might vainly imagine that from such a family only deeds of honor, of valor, acts of righteousness would be known to earth. Alas for our hope in the best of men!

He has scarcely set foot upon dry ground when we read, (Gen 9:20-21), Noah began to be a husbandman and he planted a vineyard, and he drank of the wine, and was drunken, and he was uncovered in his tent, and down the race went again! Man has fallen, and his nakedness is uncovered before God, and the shame of it is seen by his own blood and bone. Truly, by the deeds of the law no flesh shall be justified in His sight, because our deeds are not worthy of it. Faith becomes the only foundation of righteousness. That is what the eleventh chapter of Hebrews was written to teach us. As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he, and when once a man has fixed his faith in the living God, and keeps it there, the God in whom he trusts keeps him, and that is his only hope. For by grace are ye saved through faith and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast (Eph 2:8-9).

NIMROD

the principal personage in the tenth chapter has his offices given. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord, and he was a king. The beginning of his kingdom by Babel and Erich, and Accad and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.

Our attention has been called to the fact that before this chapter, nations are unknown, but now established government appears. Chapter 9:6 is the basis of it, and in Rom 13:2-4 we see that God set the seal of His approval upon it. Nimrod comes forth as the first autocrat and conqueror. One can almost hear the marches to and fro of the people in this chapter; cities are going up and civilization doubtless thought it was making advance, but how far it advances we shall speedily see.

The things in its favor were dexterously employed. Some wise men suddenly remembered that they all had one speech and said, We ought to make the most of it. True, as Joseph Parker says, Wise men are always getting up schemes that God has to bring to naught. Worldly wise men have been responsible for the most of the confusion our civilization has seen. Men who get together in the places of Shinar and embark in real estate, and lay out great projects and pull in unsuspecting associates, and start up tremendous enterprises, and say, under their breath, in their secret meetings, We will get unto ourselves a great name. We will exalt ourselves to heaven, and after the world has done obeisance to us, we will walk among the angels and witness them bow down; but God still lives and reigns. The men who count themselves greatest are, in His judgment, the least; and those that reckon themselves most farseeing, He reckons the most foolish; and those who propose to get into Heaven by ways of their own appointment, He shuts out altogether and drives them from His presence, and they become wandering stars, reserved for the blackness of darkness; for we must learn that self-exaltation brings Gods abasement. He that exalteth himself shall be humbled, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted. God is willing that man shall come to Heaven but, as some one has said, If we ever get to Heaven at all, it will not be by the dark and rickety staircases of our own invention, but on the ladder of Gods love in Christ Jesus.

God is willing that we should have a mansion, but the mansion of His desire is not the wooden or brick structure that would totter and fall, but the building of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. God is willing that we should dwell in towers, but not the towers of pride and pomp, but those of righteousness wrought out for us in Christ Jesus.

Fuente: The Bible of the Expositor and the Evangelist by Riley

CRITICAL NOTES.
The whole earth.] The then known world with all its human inhabitants. One language and of one speech.] Heb. Of one lip, and one (kind of) words. Murphy renders, Of one lip and one stock of words, and remarks, In the table of nations the term tongue was used to signify what is here expressed by two terms. This is not undesigned. The two terms are not synonymous or parallel, as they form the parts of one compound predicate. One stock of words, then, we conceive, naturally indicates the matter, the substance, or the material of language. This was one and the same to the whole race. The term lip, which is properly one of the organs of articulation, is, on the other hand, used to denote the form, that is, the manner of speaking, the mode of using and connecting the matter of speech, the system of laws by which the inflections and derivations of a language are conducted. By a combination of terms expressing the two elements which go to constitute every organic reality. Many have held that this original language was Hebrew, but recent researches in comparative philology have shown that all the languages of the world can be traced to one original tongue, which though not identical with the Hebrew has a close affinity with it.

Gen. 11:2. As they journeyed.] Heb. In their breaking up. The word is used of the breaking up of an encampment of wandering tribes for the purpose of removing from place to place. They refers to the whole earth mentioned in the previous versethe whole race of man. From the east.] Eastward is proved to be the meaning of the phrase by Gen. 13:11, where Lot is said to journey from Bethel to the plain of the Jordan, which is to the east. The human race, consisting it might be of five hundred families, journeys eastwards with a few points of deflection to the south, along the Euphrates valley, and comes to a plain of surpassing fertility in the land of Shinar (Murphy). A plain in the land of Shinar.] Probably the same as Babylonia. Herodotus describes the neighbourhood of Babylon as a great plain.

Gen. 11:3. And they said one to another.] Heb. A man said to his neighbour. Go to.] A mere hortatory interjection, equivalent to our idiom, come, let us do so and so (Bush). The phrase suggests a resolute will and tempera stern purpose to oppose the will of God. Let us make brick.] The noun and verb here are kindred to each other in form. The noun is plural, meaning bricks, and the verb means to make bricks; both of these forms are from the word meaning to be white, referring to the whitish clay of which the bricks were made (Jacobus). The plain abounded in clayey soil, but was deficient in stones. Burn them thoroughly.] The common custom was to dry the bricks in the sun, but these are to be burnt so as to make them more durable. Many of these have been found in the ruins of Babylon. When any considerable degree of thickness was required, the practice in the Babylonian structures seems to have been, to form the mass with sun-dried bricks, and then invest it with a case of burnt bricks (Bush). Slime. Heb. Bitumen. The LXX has . This was a kind of mineral cement of a pitchy nature. Layard observes that the cement in the ruins is so tenacious that it is almost impossible to detach an entire brick from the mass (Alford).

Gen. 11:4. Whose top may reach unto heaven] Heb. And his head in the heavens. Such an expression is hyperbolical in other portions of Scripture, but here it seems that they indulged the hope that the heavens might be thus reached. The heathen fable of giants attempting to scale the heavens is probably a dim tradition founded on this fact.Let us make us a name] Hence their purpose was not to provide against another deluge, but to transmit their fame by such a bold and gigantic undertaking to future generations.

Gen. 11:5. And the Lord came down] Speaking after the manner of men to denote the Divine interference. The Heb. has Jehovah both in this and the next verse.

Gen. 11:6. Behold the people is one] One race with one purpose (Murphy). They were a unity as a State, embodying one great idea.They begin to do] Heb. This is their beginning to do. Such was their undertaking.

Gen. 11:7. Confound their language] The term here rendered confound means to pour together, in a way to produce confusion of sounds or dialects (Jacobus)That they may not understand one anothers speech] Heb. One anothers lip. This is the immediate result of diversifying the formative law of human speech, even though the material elements were to remain much the same as before. (Murphy)

Gen. 11:9. Therefore is the name of it called Babel] This name is connected with the Hebrew verb meaning to confound, and would mean properly confusion. But the native etymology is Bab Ilthe gate of Il or Elthe gate of God. This may have been a name given to it by Nimrod (Smith), signifying his proud and atheistic designs, but afterwards applied (the same name) to express the confounding result more emphatically (Jacobus).

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.Gen. 11:1-9

THE BUILDERS OF BABEL

It is a melancholy fact that the evil of our nature tends continually to increase, and assume a sad variety of forms. As men abide under the power of evil they wax worse and worse. We have an instance of this downward tendency in the builders of Babel. Since the flood the course of sin may be thus traced:

(1) In the form of sensual indulgence. The type was drunkenness, of which Noah has given a sad example.

(2) Disregard of parental authority. Ham is a typical example of the loss of reverence towards those who are entitled to claim it by the ordinance of Providence.

(3) In the form of ambition. We have the type in the builders of Babel. Their work was an embodiment of the most daring form of human iniquity, while their frustrated purpose vindicated the supremacy of the Divine rule. The builders of Babel raised a monument of human sin and folly. Let us consider the forms of evil which are illustrated by their work.

I. The love of glory. By the building of a city and tower they intended to make for themselves a name. They would indulge the passion for fame at all costs, and, therefore, engaged in these gigantic labours to secure that end. Such was clearly their motive. It is not likely that they built a city and a high tower to provide against the calamity of another flood, for we can scarcely suppose that they were so foolish as to think that any adequate provision could be made; and even had they thought so, we can hardly imagine that they would have built it upon a plain. Nor is it probable that they intended to set up an idols temple. They undertook this stupendous work for the glory of their own name, and not for that of an idol. Babel contained the germ of the worship of humanity rather than the ordinary forms of idolatry. These men wanted to raise a monument to their own glory. This has ever been the cry of ambitious mento make a name. There is a healthy form of ambition when a man allows a noble purpose to be dominated by conscience. To the firmness and determination which comes from an ambition so regulated we owe some of the greatest reforms in social manners, politics, and religion. But with ordinary human nature, ambition takes the worst forms. Men make their own greatness and fame the principal concern of life, till the pursuit of these becomes an absorbing passion by which they are so blinded that they defy the Supreme Ruler of all, and presume to His place. What an example have we of human ambition in that thirst for universal dominion which has infected all nations from the earliest times, and still rages throughout the world! To this may be traced many of the evils that afflict societychiefly war, with all the awful calamities which it brings. This sin of ambition issues in most powerful evils, as it is, for the most part, the temptation of strong characters.

1. The boldest schemes of ambition are generally the work of a few. One man, such as Nimrod, conceives an ambitious scheme and gathers a few like-minded with himself around him. These influence the many, who possess no ability to take the lead, and who are, therefore, ready to obey the command of superiors. The people do not originate the great ideas and schemes which rule the world. They adopt those of others. History illustrates the good and evil forms which this fact assumes. The builders of Babel saw their own glory reflected in the many who assisted in carrying out their schemes.

2. Such ambition involves the slavery of the many. The multitude rush eagerly to carry out the designs of a few bold and clever minds, but end in becoming their slaves. The ambition of the great often results in the death of liberty.

II. False ideas of the unity of the race. Gods purpose was that men should spread over the world, and become influential and great by conquering difficulties, and subduing all things to their use. This would seem to have the effect of dividing the human family, and in the end causing a loss of the sense of unity. Hence the builders of Babel thought that they would prevent such a result. They would devise means by which the people should be onea compact brotherhood. But the Divine idea of the unity of the human race was far different. Gods plan was to secure unity by diversity, as He does throughout all His works in the natural world. He intended that the true unity of humanity should be spiritualan invisible tie by which men are bound to Himself and to one another by the bonds of faith, obedience, and love. These ambitious men had false ideas as to what constituted the true unity of the race.

1. They thought that it was external. Hence they built a city and a tower. They provided that they should dwell together, bound by the ties of a common interest. They sought, by means wholly external and artificial, to make themselves one peoplea compact body, with a strong defence against all disasters. Men have ever sought to make themselves great by the city and the tower.

2. They held that the individual must be sacrificed to the outward grandeur of the State. This is the genius of all Babel-building, to make the city supreme, and to sink the individual. All must be sacrificed to one idea: the nationStateConstitution. It is not within the province of worldly ambition to recognise the sublime importance of the individual soul. Hence the conflict between the policies of statecraft and the interests of true religion. This exaltation of the State above the individual has

(1) A political form. The great nations of antiquity strove for universal dominion, and in the pursuit of it trampled upon the dearest interests of men. Ancient Rome sought to make mankind one by the power of the sword. Whatever evils might be inflicted upon humanity, the city and the emperor must be great. The rage for conquest and dominion must end in the glorification of the few and the degradation of the many.

(2) An ecclesiastical form. In the history of Christianity we can trace the attempt to magnify the Church at the expense of the individual. The Church must be maintained in outward grandeur and influence, though to secure that end souls must be held in the bondage of error and superstition. The Roman pontiffs presumed to govern the Church from an earthly centre, and to subject all Christendom to their dominion. This is in direct contradiction to the teaching of Christ, which asserts that the Church is to be governed invisibly by the Holy Spirit. That Spirit guides believers as a community, bearing the witness of God to the children of the world, but at the same time enters into each man by himself, making the individual soul his temple. Ecclesiastical-Babel builders attempt to destroy the Divine order by their glorification of what is external, and does not belong to the real essence of Christian life.

III. Presuming to place themselves above Providence. In their wild ambition, they designed a tower whose top should reach to heaven. This was an attempt to cast off the control of Providence and to become a Providence to themselves. It was, in effect, presuming to the place of the Most High. Such is the pride of men. They cast off the rule of God, seek to pierce the very heavens, and to acknowledge nothing above themselves. When God is shut out from the direction of human affairs, then there is no limit placed to mans blasphemous presumption except the arrest of it by Divine judgment.

1. God interferes in all matters which threaten His government. It is true that God continually governs mankind; yet there are certain junctures of human history in which His interference is specially manifest. God reigns in nature, which, in its ordinary course, reveals His power as much as any miracles; still, a miracle affords a distinct evidence of the working of a will. So in this instance, when the pride of man presumed so far, God manifestly and distinctly interfered. In language accommodated to our human modes of thought and expression, the Lord said, Let us go down, and then confound their language, that they may not understand one anothers speech (Gen. 11:7). God is jealous of His honour, and to presume to that is to tempt justice.

2. God often interferes effectually by unexpected means. He confounded the language of these builders of Babel. They might have had, even in their presumption, a vague suspicion that God would be able to overthrow their work. But they could hardly have imagined that an arrest would have been put upon their labours in so extraordinary a manner as the confusion of their speech. God has many ways by which He can bring men to a sense of His Divine sovereignty. He can reach men in the very depths of their nature by sudden and unexpected means. These foolish builders imagined that they were safe in the unity of their speech, yet it was here that they were vanquished.

IV. A premature attempt to realise that better time coming for humanity. By means of their gigantic work the builders of Babel sought to promote unity, peace, and harmony among their fellow-men. These were objects in themselves good, but they attempted to secure them by improper means. They tried to realise the gifts of a later and better age. Men shall be one, and live in peace; but for this blessed condition of humanity we must be content to wait. The Bible teaches that there is a bright future for the race. When the kingdom of God is fully established amongst men, unity and peace will prevail. That blessed idea was for a moment realised when the Spirit was given on the day of Pentecost (Act. 4:32). Socialism has endeavoured to bring about this state of things, but the time is unripe. Such systems for the improvement of mankind only lay hold upon fragments of the truth. There is a unity possible for humanity, but it is inward, not outward; something out of sightpurely spiritual. Christianity can alone secure this blessing for mankind. As the hand and the foot have no direct connection, but each is connected with one centre of life, so when men have deep and intimate relations with Christ they have the most real union among themselves. The gifts of Christianity are one faith and love, making mankind one. The Christian idea of history is, that God intends, by means of Christ, to build the human race into a true unity, and every attempt to gain that glorious end, apart from that idea, is vain. The setting up of the kingdom of God on earth is the grand consummation for which all spiritual men yearn, but that can only be accomplished by spiritual laws. The work of all Babel-builders is doomed to perish.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON THE VERSES

Gen. 11:1. The possession of a common language is a great promoter of unity of thought and purpose.

What mankind was in regard to unity of language is what God designs them to be in Gospel times, but in a deeper and more real sense. It is the work of Christ to make men one in faith, hope, and love. Such a unity of conviction, feeling, and aspiration would teach men to speak the same thing (1Co. 1:10).

It is worthy of remark that the modern researches into language have recognised the original affinity of most known languages to one common original speech. The sundering and parting of the nations is Gods own work. As labour was the penalty for the sin of Paradise, so is separation the punishment for this sin of pride. In both cases, however, was the punishment at the same time a blessing.(Calwer.)

Sin perverts the sweet blessing of one speech to conspiracy against God. (Hughes.)

Gen. 11:2. Men easily discover a place whereon to erect the monuments of their ambition. They are permitted to defy heaven, though that liberty be an awful gift.

Wickedness dwells where it finds a fitting place for its purpose.
It is not difficult to suggest a number of reasons to show that the land of Shinar was the centre from whence a thorough and entire distribution of the human race over the face of the whole earth could be most readily and conveniently made; and as the Valley of the Euphrates was the route which, of all others, was the best suited to conduct the founders of post-diluvian society to the place so peculiarly fitted for their subsequent dispersion, we are warranted in supposing that the stranding of the ark occurred at some spot in the vicinity of that valley, from whence the descent was easy, and free from the immense difficulties that must have impeded the passage down the declivities of the lofty Agridagh.(Bush.)

The preference for the hill-country does not appear to have belonged to the young humanity. Under the most obvious points of view, convenience, fertility, and easier capability of cultivation seem to have given to these children of nature a preference for the plain. Zahn gives extracts from Hippocrates and Herodotus in proof of the singular productiveness of this land of the palm, where the grain yields from two hundred to three hundred fold. Thence came luxury, which was followed by the cultivation of the paradisiacal gardens (gardens of Semiramis) and a life of sensuality, together with a sensual religious worship.(Lange.)

Sinners make the gifts of nature to minister to impiety and pride.
Men rebel against God, even where His plentiful goodness is most manifest.

Gen. 11:3. Sinners encourage each other in their rebellion against God.

The arts of life and the free productions of nature may be pressed into the service of iniquity.
Moses would intimate that they were not prompted to the work by the facilities that offered themselves, but that they were disposed to contend with great and arduous obstaclesa circumstance that went to enhance the greatness of the crime, for how could it be that they should thus wear and exhaust themselves in this laborious exercise unless because they had set themselves in a frenzied opposition to God? Difficulty often deters us from necessary works, but they, without stones or mortar, do not scruple to attempt an edifice that should transcend the clouds! Their example teaches us to what lengths ambition will urge men who give way to their unhallowed lustings.(Calvin.)

Gen. 11:4. Their only object was to found a universal monarchy, by which all the families of the earth, in all future ages, might be held in subjection. A very little reflection will convince us that such a scheme must of necessity be founded in ambition; that it required union, and of course a city, to carry it into execution; that a tower or citadel was also necessary to repel those who might be disposed to dispute their claims; and that if these measures were once carried into effect, there was nothing in the nature of things to prevent the accomplishment of their design.(Fuller.)

It can scarcely be doubted that the ancient heathen fable of the attempt of the giants to climb the heavens owes its origin to some distorted traditions relative to this fact. The memory of the design of the builders of Babel being handed down in its native boldness of expression to nations unacquainted with the Mosaic history and with Eastern language, who were also fond of the marvellous and skilful in fable, would very naturally give rise to the story of the Titans war with heaven and the discomfiture which followed.(Bush.)

For the distinction and pre-eminence of a name men will toil against all difficulties. They scruple not to presume to the habitation of God if they may thus exalt themselves.
The wildest schemes of ambition are consistent with a calm deliberation of purpose. These men could carefully design and plan a city and a tower.
Their declared object was to make to themselves a name. This was the proud aim of heathenismto attain to glory without God, by human wisdom and might. The nations henceforth walk in their own ways (Act. 14:16), until, from their vain and scattered attempts, they are re-united in Jerusalem in the Pentecosta specimen only of what remains to be realised.(Jacobus.)

To make themselves a name, men are ready to dishonour the name of God.
The Babel-builders opposed the design of God in scattering them over the face of the earth, but God has many ways of accomplishing His will.
No name which men can make, without the help and approval of God, can be lasting.

Gen. 11:5. The language which de scribes the ways of God to man must be accommodated to our infirmity and imperfect knowledge. We are taught thus to study simplicity in describing the Divine operations.

However long God may delay, yet He will surely interfere with the designs of evil men.
All human history shows a Providence, but there are marked epochs when God distinctly appears. There are events which summon the attention of men to the Power above them.

Sinners sometimes imagine that God is far from the world, but there are times when the conviction is forced upon them that He is near.
The children of men, whether for weal or woe, must in the end be brought face to face with God.
There is something here characteristic of the times after the deluge. The presence of the Lord seems not to have been withdrawn from the earth before that event. He walked in the garden when Adam and Eve were there. He placed the ministers and symbols of His presence before it when they were expelled. He expostulated with Cain before and after his awful crime. He saw the wickedness of man, and the land was corrupt before Him. In all this He seems to have been present with man on earth. He lingered in the garden as long as His forbearance could be expected to influence man for good. He at length appointed the limit of one hundred and twenty years. And after watching over Noah during the deluge, He seems to have withdrawn His visible and gracious presence from the earth. Hence the propriety of the phrase, The Lord came down. He still deals in mercy with a remnant of the human race, and has visited the earth and manifested His presence in a wondrous way. But He has not yet taken up His abode among men, as He did in the garden, and as He intimates that He will sometime do on the renovated earth.(Murphy.)

It was not merely the city and the tower which God came down to see, but rather the apostacy, rebellion, and pride of which they were the outward manifestations. God proceeds from the work to the doers of it. The Divine judgment comes home to the individual.

1. The wickedness of these confederates: they were all sons of Adam, apostate, perishing, in his image.

2. The weakness of them. They were but sons of the dust who thus set themselves to build against God. Jehovah descends to take notice of these, who are but as the dust of the balance before Him.(Hughes.)

Gen. 11:6. In like simplicity is depicted the self-willed, God-defying spirit of combination and ambition which had now budded in the imagination of man. The people is one, one race with one purpose. And they have all one lip. They understand one anothers mind. No misunderstanding has arisen from diversity of language. This is their beginning. The beginning of sin, like that of strife, is as when one letteth out water. The Lord sees in this commencement the seed of growing evil. All sin is dim and small in its first rise; but it swells by insensible degrees to the most daring and gigantic proportions. And now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do. Now that they have made this notable beginning of concentration, ambition, and renown, there is nothing in this way which they will not imagine or attempt.(Murphy.)

God is represented as taking counsel with Himself. He acts not from mere will, but from eternal reasonsafter the counsel of His will. Deliberation suits the majesty of the Supreme Ruler.
Men would carry out many evil designs to a successful issue if they were not restrained by the Providence of God.
The depravity of human nature is under control during the course of the present moral government of God. Were every man permitted freely to carry out all the evil in his heart, society could not exist.
In Gods dealings with mankind the facts of human nature are accepted.
The ironical element in the rule of the Divine righteousness appears again in the history of the tower building, after its grandest display in the primitive time. It is just from the false striving after the idol of an outward national unity, that God suffers to go forth the dispersing of the nations. Without doubt, too, is there an ironical force in the words, and now nothing will be restrained from them.(Lange.)

Proud and presumptuous undertakings are a scorn and derision to God.(Hughes.)

Gen. 11:7. God has many waysand often unexpected onesof bringing the counsel of the wicked to nought.

The judgment might have been executed upon the works of these daring men, but God chose rather to afflict themselves by bringing disorder into their own powers. God has access to the innermost recesses of mans nature.

The Providence of God often takes away from men the gifts which they have abused. Men are punished in those instruments which minister to their iniquity.

Whatever was the precise change wrought in human language, it was with the express object of making the builders unintelligible to each otherso as to break up their unity of action. The Scripture gives us here the only history of the division of mankind into peoples by means of different tongues. And the Scripture also tells us how, under the Gospel, national distinctions were broken down in order to introduce a universal Church (Act. 8:14).(Jacobus.)

Hence we perceive that the interposition of Providence in confounding the lip of mankind, is the historical solution of the enigma of philology, the existence of diversity of language at the same time with the natural persistency of form, and the historical unity of the human race. The data of philology, indicating that the form is the side of language needing to be touched in order to produce diversity, coincide also with the facts here narrated. The preternatural diversification of the form, moreover, marks the order amid variety which prevailed in this great revolution of mental habitude. It is not necessary to suppose that seventy languages were produced from one at the very crisis of this remarkable change, but only the few generic forms that sufficed to effect the Divine purpose, and by their interaction to give origin to all subsequent varieties of language or dialect. Nor are we to imagine that the variant principles of formation went into practical development all at once, but only that they started a process which, in combination with other operative causes, issued in all the diversities of speech which are now exhibited in the human race.(Murphy.)

The confusion of tongues has done much towards separating the families of mankind. Each nation becomes bound up in its own interests, and strange or hostile towards all others. Difference of language makes men barbarians towards one another.
Herein God opposeth Himself to the sons of Adam. They aim at getting a name, and to prevent dispersion. God is resolved to make them that they shall not understand their own names, nor the speech of their neighbours.(Hughes.)

The spirit of hatred was the cause of the sundering and scattering of the human family; the spirit of love can alone make them one.
The division of languages, though an obstacle to schemes of human ambition, will not be suffered to be an obstacle to the triumph of the cause of God. Of this, God Himself gave a proof and pledge, in the miracle wrought on the day of Pentecostthe counterpart of the miracle at Babel. The separation of nations will not hinder the unity of faith. At this very time, the increasing facility of intercourse, the increasing use of our own tongue over vast continents in the East and West, and the familiar mingling of natives of various lands, are rapidly diminishing the difficulties which differences of language occasion; and whether, literally, these differences are to disappear, or are merely to become innocuous, assuredly, in the end, there shall be one lip, and one Lord, and one heart for all.(Candlish.)

Gen. 11:8. The effect of the Divine interposition is here noted. And the Lord scattered them abroad. Not understanding one anothers mode of speech, they feel themselves practically separated from one another. Unity of counsel and of action becomes impossible. Misunderstanding naturally follows, and begets mistrust. Diversity of interest grows up, and separation ensues. Those who have a common speech retreat from the centre of union to a sequestered spot, where they may form a separate community among themselves. The dispersion of mankind at the same time put an end to the ambitious projects of the few. They left off to build the city. It is probable that the people began to see through the plausible veil which the leaders had cast over their selfish ends. The city would be abandoned to the immediate party of Nimrod. Its dwellings would probably be too numerous for the remaining inhabitants.(Murphy.)

Human plans are confounded that the Divine order may proceed from them. Such is the course of the worlds history.(Krummacher.)

Human iniquity may be overruled for good. God is ever, in the course of His providence, bringing good out of evil. He makes the wrath of man to praise Him, and when the remainder of that wrath can but issue in a purpose only evil He restrains it, so that becomes ineffectual.
How liable are the schemes of ungodly men to be interrupted and defeated in the midst of their execution. The builders of Babel had made considerable progress, and were, doubtless, anticipating the satisfaction they should experience in its completion. But they were arrested in mid career. The eager aspirants for happiness form their plans; they prosecute their designs; they advance in their prospects; partial success animates them to more diligent exertions; but sooner or later God stops them in their progress, and either dashes all their labours to the dust, or says to them, Thou fool, this night shall thy soul be required of thee. Consider, too, the means which God took to effect His purpose. They were the most unlooked-for that could be imagined. And thus does God interpose to disappoint the expectations of worldly men! He has ten thousand ways to render their plans abortive, or to embitter to them the very things in which they have sought their happiness. We have laboured for honour and distinction. He suffers us, perhaps, to attain our wishes, and then makes our elevation a source of nothing but disquietude and pain. Many have looked for enjoyment in the acquisition of a partner, or a family, who after a time would give the world, perhaps, to loose the indissoluble knot, or to have been written childless in the earth. In short, the Governor of the universe is never at a loss for means to confound the devices of the wise, or frustrate the counsels of the ungodly.(Bush.)

All systems of philosophyso-calledwhich through the pride of the human intellect have presumed to subvert Gods truth, or impiously to intrude within that shadow of mystery which He has cast around His throne, shall be brought to nought, and the Babel speech of error be confounded.

O, sons of earth! attempt ye still to rise,
By mountains piled on mountains, to the skies!
Heaven still with laughter the vain toil surveys,
And buries madmen in the heaps they raise.Pope.

Traditions relate that the tower was demolished by the lightning, with terrible tempest. Yet it has been supposed that the immense pyramidal tower built thereabouts by Nebuchadnezzar was erected on the site and ruins of this tower. In the ruins that are now found in that vicinity there is the appearance of a conflagration, the bricks seeming to have been run into solid masses by the action of extreme heat. A Jewish tradition given by Bochart declares that fire fell from heaven and split the tower through to its foundation. The distance of the modern Birs Nimrud from Babylon is the great difficulty in the way of its identification. Yet the Birs temple gives us the best idea of the ancient Babylonian temple tower, and may show us the probable character and shape of the building, at least better than any other ruin.(Jacobus.)

ILLUSTRATIONS ON CHAPTER 11

BY THE
REV. WM. ADAMSON

Motive in History! Gen. 11:1-9.

(1) It has been suggested by Hopkins that the primal disobedience of Adam and Eve is stated not to show forth its strangeness, but to disclosein the several scenes which were its immediate consequentsthe wondrous affectionateness of Him who had been disobeyed. And this is done with the pen of a master. And so with the homicide of Cain, and the vices of the antediluvians; they are used as a foil to bring out a vivid illustration of the Divine gentleness. It is true that these all reveal to us that God is a consuming fire towards sin, and wilful, obstinate sinners; but even these revelations are like the dark background which the artist places to set out more conspicuously his designs of fair colours.

(2) Why may we not suppose that the same paramount purpose stands out in bold relief all along the Mosaic book, and thus includes the Babel narrative? The Divine goodness appears like a rainbow spanning the dark cloud of human pride and ambition. There is the Tongue Tower ruin, but it lies in Genesis 9 as the plant lies, out of whose root springs a more vigorous stem and beautiful flower than before the wind and storm broke its first shoot. It reminds us of the savannah of the west which the fire has scorchedupon whose brown bare bosom the showers of rain fall, to make the wilderness and solitary place glad, and the blistered desert to bloom as the rose. Divine gentleness revealed! Such is the primary (we do not say the only) motive in Genesis 9.

Then let us sing, our shrouded way thus wending,

Lifes hidden snares among,

Of mercy, and of judgment sweetly blending

Earths sad but lovely song.Macmillan.

Word-Witnesses! Gen. 11:1-9. The long-lost records of Babylonia and Assyria promise, when fully examined, to throw a flood of light not only upon Divine Revelation, but upon the history, religious and social status of great primeval nations, whose names, and some of whose acts, are mentioned in Scripture. Very much, Professor Porter, has yet to be done by the traveller and the excavator before the sources of information contained on sculptured slabs and inscribed tablets have been reached. When that is done, a still more difficult task will remain in the classification of the materials and the deciphering of the records. But we look forward hopefully, and may confidently anticipate the most complete success. Testimony clear and indisputable will then be furnished to the matchless truthfulness of the Word of God by the ruins of

Bels cloud-capt tower, her gorgeous palaces,
Her solemn temples, her Tongue-Towr itself.

Genesis and Chaldean Legions! Gen. 11:1-9.

(1) Before the Chaldean discoveries by Smith, those who wished to believe the Genesis narrative a myth roundly asserted that it was a chimera of some crazed mind, or the creation of some corrupt one. No sooner, however, was the discovery made, and the correctness of the cuneiform inscription cipher attested, than the same enemies, whose wish was father to the thought, asserted that the Chaldean accounts were legendary, and that the Genesis narrative was also legendary because derived from these same Chaldean historical myths.
(2) The simple brevity of the history in Genesis is familar; whereas, Gardiner points out that the Chaldean inscriptions are obscure, verbose, and swelling out at every point with the monstrosities of early mythology. It is as if a modern scholar should sit down to pick out the grains of truth in the prehistoric myths of ancient Greece, and having set them down soberly, should then be told that his work must itself be legendary because derived from legendary sources.
(3) Even though Abraham did analyse these Chaldean legends with matchless skill and penetration, and drew from them for our use the simple history out of which they had gradually grown, this would not affect the truthfulness of his work. And if we add that Abraham (or Moses) was divinely inspired to recover the original truth from this mass of legend, the truthfulness and trustworthiness of the Genesis narrative is placed beyond dispute.

Whence, but from heaven, could men unskilled in arts,
In several ages born, in several parts,
Weave such agreeing truths.Dryden.

Babel Bricks! Gen. 11:2-4. These emigrants to Shinar were evidently dissatisfied with a patriarchal life, and desirous of founding a great monarchy. I. Ambition, or the Perversion of the divinely-implanted principle, Excelsior. It

(1) cautions us to beware of our own hearts, and

(2) counsels us to be careful of the Divine Will. II. Assumption, or the Pre-supposition of mans independence of God. It

(1) cautions us to remember our entire dependence, and

(2) counsels us to regard the Divine pre-eminence as essential to our happiness. III. Association, or the Persuasion that human unity means human perpetuity. It

(1) cautions us against forgetting that God must come into any scheme after unity, and

(2) counsels us about fulfilling the Divine Ideal of unity in Him. Lessons:

(1) Moral Towers of Babel (great or small) should be erected in Gods name, and carried through in Gods strength;

(2) Moral Towers of Babel (great or small), if not so attempted and accomplished, tend to dishonour Gods name, and to disown Gods strength;

(3) Moral Towers of Babel (great or small) thus dishonouring Him, are sure, sooner or later, to be overthrown by God, who has all forces at His command; and

(4) Moral Towers of Babel (great or small) conceived in Gods name, constructed by Gods strength, and contributing to Gods glory, are certain of the Divine permission and permanence. Thus,

Scripture, in this life-history, unfoldeth

Some lessons sweet to me;

Gods goodness in reproof my eye beholdeth,

And His severity.

Shinar Site! Gen. 11:2.

(1) Noahs sons would come down from the high lands of Armenia and settle in the warmer plains below. Journeying from the valley of Araxes, they would travel along the eastern side of the Koordish mountains, without finding a good place to cross them until they were almost as low down as Babylon. That is the course which the caravans take from Tabreez at this day. Coming to Kermansheh, they would turn short about, and pass through the mountains towards Bagdad. Thus between the Tigris and Euphrates we have the land of Shinar, where Nimrod built Babel or Babylon.
(2) Descending, as Wylie observes, from the lofty mountains which form the northern rampart of Asia Minor, the Tigris and Euphrates hold on their course to the south till they arrive on the rich and level plains around the ancient city of Bagdad. Here they unite their streams, and flow through a valley which bears marks of having, in ancient times, been perhaps the richest and loveliest region on the earth, and which is still surprisingly fertile, though quite neglected. There may have been design on the part of Nimrod in seeking to establish his empires metropolis in the region where Paradise was supposed to have stood. Design or no design, Nimrods

Cities have been, and vanished; fanes have sunk,
Heaped into shapeless ruin; sands oerspread
Fields that were Edens; millions, too, have shrunk
To a few starving hundreds, or have fled
From off the page of being.Percival.

Brick-Bitumen! Gen. 11:3.

(1) There are ruins of huge temple-towers at Erech or Warka. The Warka temple is built of sun-dried bricks laid in mud mortar, with layers of reed put in from time to time to hold the mass together. The bricks are small and inferior; but they have the name and titles of the king stamped on them.
(2) The wood being chiefly palm, and there being probably some superstitions in regard to using them for building purposes, the builders had to find some other materials upon which to work. Stone there was none, and they did not seem to know how to make lime-mortar. But they had excellent clay for brick-making, and knew the art of the brick-kiln.
(4) Bitumen is a black, slimy, viscous substance found in springs, coming up out of the earth. In this the bricks were laid. At the present day it exists in abundance. The Arabs collect it, and sell it at Mosul for building purposes, and for lining boats. Old boats plastered with bitumen, such as those of the present, have been found buried under the soil in Babylonia. Thus Nature, while ministering to mans necessity, makes him the pen by which to write for future generations, upon the mysterious mud, the solemn lesson that

All things have their end;

Nations and cities, which have diseases like to men,
Must have like death that we have.Webster.

Slime-Symbolism! Gen. 11:3.

(1) Jukes says that this slime was the sulphureous compound formed from the corruption of animal and vegetable substances. Well does it represent that dangerous elementso ready to burst out into a blazethat cement of self-love and lust of power, by which mystic Babylon is now held together.
(2) It is remarkable that this slime is easily melted again, though intensively adhesive and tenacious, rendering it difficult to loosen the bricks. How powerful and tenacious is the system of Papal Babylon, defying all human efforts to disintegrate it. Nevertheless, the fire of Divine judgment, kindled by the breath of Infinite holiness, will one day dissolve the slime, so that the whole fabric will crumble.
(3) As surely as the awful foreshadowings of Jehovah upon the material Babel have been realised to the very letter, as hundreds of modern travellers have perceived, so certainly those terrible forewarnings of coming overthrow of the mystical Babel shall be fulfilled; for

Babel, as smitten with the curse of God,
Shall fall in ruinous heap, and sinkas sinks
A millstone in the mighty watersdown
Into a dreadful chasm of fire.

Sin Fecundity! Gen. 11:4.

(1) Pascal says that it is astonishing that the mystery which is farthest from our knowledgethe transmission of original sinshould be that without which we can have no true knowledge of ourselves. It is in this abyss that the clue to our condition takes its turnings and windings, insomuch that man is more incomprehensible without this mystery than this mystery is incomprehensible to man.

(2) Apply these two profound sentences to Genesis 9. Without a belief in the Scripture doctrine of original sin, how can we understand the fall of Noah, and the subsequent national, individual corruption at Babel? Grasping the truth that sin is transmitted from mind to mind, as diseases are to the body, it furnishes a clue to the pride, passion, and presumption of the Babelites in their heaven-defying, God-dishonouring structure.

(3) There is certainly evil, says McCosh, in our world; whence came it? We know not. The man of science is often telling us in his realm of scientific disclosures, that the fact is so-and-so, but he has to add, How it is so, I cannot tell. The profound theologian, St. Augustine, asks, Where is evil, or whence comes it, since God the Good has created all things? A quaker poet replies:

No victory comes of all our strife;

From all we grasp, the meaning slips;

The Sphinx sits at the gate of life,

With the old question on her awful lips.

Birs Nimrud! Gen. 11:4. This ruin stands six miles south west of Hillah, i.e., six miles from the Euphrates. Nebuchadnezzars inscription has been found, in which he says that he built it on the ruins of the Tower of Babel. Smith reads an Assyrian fragment of writing in columns to this effectthat the wickedness of men caused the gods to overthrow tower; that what they built in the day the God overthrew in the night; and that in His anger He scattered them abroad, and confused their counsel. It is remarkable that the Jews have a tradition that fire and earthquake were agencies of its ruin. Certainly it is rent in two nearly the whole way down, and bears traces of fire. Rawlinson says that it consisted of seven stages of brickwork of different colours, as black, orange, red, gold plating, etc. Bochart says that fire from heaven split it through to its foundation. From the fact that the angles face the cardinal points, it is evident that the temple towers were used for astronomical observation, to gaze upon

That wondrous blaze; ten thousand trembling fires,
And dancing lustres, where the unsteady eye,
Restless and dazzled, wanders unconfined
Oer all this field of glories.Barbauld.

Tongue Tower! Gen. 11:6. The building of the Tower of Babel, and the confusion of tongues, was so wonderful an event in itself, and produced such an event upon the human race, that, if it was a fact and not a myth, one would expect its leading incidents to be preserved with great tenacity in primeval traditions. And such is the case. The narrative in Genesis 11 is brief, but graphic. It contains a number of striking particulars, such as building with brick, the use of bitumen for mortar, the site of the tower, the name of the place, and the dispersion of mankind from that central region.

(2) But for that brief record, it is doubtful whether man would ever have dreamt of explorations there. Now, the Scripture narrative has not only given the key to where the hidden treasure may be, and to what the hidden treasure may prove, but it has originated and whetted the keen scientific appetite for exploration there. Thus the ruins of the Tongue Tower (Barsippa) have been found, with inscriptions recording the sin of the people, their uniting to build the tower, the anger of God, the confusion of their speech, and the scattering of the people. And the awe-struck spectator hears from their broken, voiceless lips that

Even as from man his future doom proceeds,
So nations rise or fall, according to their deeds.Southey.

World-Evil! Gen. 11:6.

(1) According to Scripture, moral and physical evil has intruded into our world. We have traces of it before man was created, in the fall of angelic beings who are ready to tempt Adam and Eve. From the very day when man fell, we have a contest going on in our world. We do not assert, with some of our older divines, that pain and death came upon the lower animals because Adam fell. But it is a noticeable fact, pointed out by McCosh, that death has reigned all along since living beings appeared, even over those who have not sinned after the similitude of Adams transgression, on that earth on which man has sinned. Our world is thus of a piece in itself, and its history is consistent throughout. Our whole experience testifies to the truthfulness of the historical record.
(2) It does not startle us, therefore, to read the Divine statement from the lips of Jehovah-Jesus in the Eternal Trinity, that, once started on a career of God-defiance, the Babel-builders would go on to deeper depths of viciousness. Their power to increase in evil was greater on account of their being able to converse in one language; therefore, the Divine goodness and gentleness of the Speakerthe Lord Jesus, who ever represents these features in the Eternal Trinityis manifest in the decision come to, that the one language should be split up into various streams flowing over the world of humanity. It was Infinite wisdom and love turning the evil that is in the world to good accountbringing, so to speak, good out of evil.

Round every thorn in the flesh there twineth
Some wreath of softening bloom.Macmillan.

Divine Order in Confusion! Gen. 11:7.

(1) The confusion of tongues was not at random. It was a systematic distribution of languages for the purpose of a systematic distribution of man in emigration. The dispersion was orderly, the differences of tongue corresponding to the differences of race. By these were the Gentiles divided in their lands, everyone after his tongue, after their families in their nations.
(2) From the earliest period there has been manifested, in the history of scientific progress, an invincible faith among scientific men that the facts of nature are capable of being arranged in conformity with laws of geometry and algebra. In other words, all have a profound conviction of the existence of what Argyll calls The reign of law, i.e., order in the midst of apparent confusion and aimlessness.

(3) There is no illogical course in arguing that those who believe in God as the Creator of order in nature have a right to conclude that He preserves the same order in history. The cataclysms in nature have an order and object; why not then the castastrophes of history. There is Divine order in the midst of historical confusion, as palpable and manifest as in that of science. Looking back upon the pathway which history has trodden, we can perceive traces of designpowerful evidences of an Infinite aimorder in the midst of confusion. Over the wheels of history, as over the wheels in Ezekiels sublime vision, is the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord.
Ye nations, bend, in reverence bend,

Ye monarchs wait His nod,

And bid the choral song ascend

To celebrate your God.White.

Language-Lesson! Gen. 11:7.

(1) It has been reached that certain medicines are administered to produce one disease, or unnatural condition of the system, in order to remove another. The evil, says Macmillan, which has deranged the body, in many instances can only be cured by another evil that will temporarily derange it. A very popular mode of taking the pain out of a burn is to expose the injured part as long as possible to the fire. It is well known that the only safe way of restoring animation to a frost-bitten limb is by rubbing it with snow, or putting it in ice-cold water. It is the bitter medicine of homopathy and allopathyspeaking generallywhich cures the bitter disease. May it not be so in the Divine healing of sin-sick humanity? The confounding of the language at Babel is generally and rightly regarded as a punishment for mans pride. But the error lies in limiting this as the only assignable reason why Jehovah administered the nauseous draught. The tongue travail of humanity in all ages has proved a medicinebitter, if you like, but still a medicine. Here homopathy and allopathy meet and fraternise. We see them in the hands of the Great and Good Physician administering the bitter draught of confusion, in order that the tongue may recover its original purity.

The Last Day only, all Gods plan revealing,

Shall teach us what we owe

To these blessed remedies, thus concealing

Themselves in marks of woe.

Shinar Sand! Gen. 11:8. The very garden of Asia, it has lost much of its glory. More than half the plain is a dry desert; though once it was made fruitful by being watered all over. The people dug canals from the Euphrates to the Tigris, and from these other little branch canals, till the whole country was covered with them, and every part watered abundantly. Then it was all one garden of cultivation; full of people and great citiesrich in grains and fruitsand everywhere grown with palm trees. Now it is all a desert. All over it you can see the remains of old canals and watercourses which once made it fruitful. The lines of embankment sometimes look like ranges of low hills from their size. Where it is not a sandy desert the country is in great part a reedy marsh, where the rivers have broken from their natural beds, and overflowed great tracts of land. The marshes are almost up to the walls of Bagdadand growing worse from year to year; a possession for the bittern, and pools of water: silent teachers of the great truth that

When nations go astray, from age to age
The effects remaina fatal heritage.Southey.

Heathen Testimony! Gen. 11:8. Until a few years back, Rawlinson remarks, there was no confirmation of the book of Genesis earlier than the time of Alexander the Great. Now, however, a flood of light is thrown on it by the cuneiform inscriptions. It is highly probable that much more of the earlier part of Genesis will be found in these Chaldean texts. Fragments have been found of the account of the Creation, and building of the Tower of Babel; and there is reason to believe that these are only parts of a series of histories, giving full accounts of these early periods. The fragments, however, relating to the Tower of Babel are unfortunately very scanty. They confirm the statements of Greek writers, according to which the Babylonians related that the gods destroyed the tower by winds.

Fools, and blind! When, planned by Baalim,
The city of confusion reard its brow
Towards heaven, a whisper of Gods voice perplexd
The builders language and their works at once.Bickersteth.

Babel Bane and Blessing! Gen. 11:9. We have I. Bane.This lies in

(1) Human Pride;
(2) Human Passion; and
(3) Human Presumption. II. Blessing.This lies in

(1) Divine Power;
(2) Divine Purpose; and
(3) Divine Prevision. The cause of the division of languages lies in an operation wrought upon the human mind, by which the original unity, thought, feeling, and will was broken up. The one primitive language, Fausset thinks, is now lostdispersed amid the various tongues which have severally appropriated its fragmentsabout to rise again with re-united parts in a new and heavenly form, when Jehovah will turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the name of Jehovah to serve Him (see Zep. 3:9) with one consent. And the Lord, says Zechariah, shall be King over all the earth. In that day there shall be one Lord, and His name one.

God reigneth, and the earth is glad! her large, self-conscious heart,
A glowing tide of life and joy pours through each quickened part;

The very stones Hosannah cry.Macmillan.

Divine-Design! Gen. 11:9.

(1) Most persons have seen the beautiful Venus Flower Basket. It is now somewhat common in museums and private collections; but few, perhaps, have minutely examined its structure. This structure, so marvellous in the mechanical and sthetic principles embodied in it, is the skeleton of a spongea soft, slimy, almost structureless creature, which we find it difficult to believe in as a veritable animal. Yet it is the law of this creaturedeveloped from a little oval or sac-like germ, destitute of all trace of the subsequent structuresto produce this wonderful framework. No sane mind, Dawson remarks, can for a moment doubt the action of a Creative Intelligence, or declare that all is due to a fortuitous concourse of atoms.
(2) As students of nature thus reason and conclude from natures phenomena recorded in geological strata, so the students of theology have a right to argue and maintain from historys phases detailed in the strata of Scripture that there is Divine design. And this even in the confusion of Babel. The scattering of the human race from the central home of Eden has produced singular results; a growth of results so intricate and exquisite unique, that we are practically shut up to the conclusion that history, as nature, is under the moulding hand of God, who doeth all after the counsel of His own will.

O, look with pity down

On erring, guilty man; not in Thy names
Of terror clad; not with those terrors armd
That monstrous Babel felt, when fear struck dumb
The scattered nations of the race of Ham.

Babel! Gen. 11:9. Traveller after traveller confesses the overpowering sensation of reverential awe which possesses the mind when contemplating the extent and magnitude of the ruins. The grey osiers growing on the river deepen the dreariness of the scene, like flags of distress on a sinking vessel; while the majestic reed-lined stream, wandering solitary amid the maze, seems to murmur something about the time when these ruins were giant palaces and towers, and when this dreary solitude was the abode of gay and thoughtless crowds set on universal empire. The meditative mindamid such mouldered and mouldering pilesreads more plainly than ever a sentiment which is true alike of individuals, cities, and empires, Be sure your sin will find you out. Like the builders of Babel, we are prone to quaff the cup of pride; therefore their fate cautions us of the danger of such a course.

We fain would eat the fruit that is forbidden,

Not heeding what God saith!

But by these flaming cherubims were chidden

Lest we should pluck our death.

Babel and Pentecost! Gen. 11:9.

(1) That day when the cloven tongues came down, and the first missionaries of Jesus spoke suddenly in many languages, was the beginning of a work which will never stop until the Gospel has made all men one againone in heart and hopeone in the name of the Lord Jesus. We do not mean, says Green, that the Gospel teaches all men the same language; though it is true that there are some words which the Gospel carries to every land and people and tongue.
(2). A Hindu and a New Zealander met upon the deck of a missionary ship. They had both been converted from their heathenism, and were brothers in Christ. But they could not speak to each other. They pointed to their bibles, shook hands, and smiled in one anothers faces; that was all they could do apparently. At last a happy thought occurred to the Hindu. With sudden joy, he exclaimed, Hallelujah! The New Zealander, in delight, cried out, Amen!

(3) Those two words, not found in their own old heathen tongues, but given to them by the Gospel, were to them the beginning again of one language and one speech. In the Patmos vision of the harpers by the glassy sea, we have the song of the mighty multitude of the redeemed from every kindred and people, and nation and tongue, in one united Church. It is a harmony of exultant praise over the realisation of the longed-for unity of Gods people. The holy Church throughout all the world doth acknowledge Thee; Allelujah! (Revelation 15)

Melodious language, wherein every thought
Finds utterance, oerspreading the circling globe,
A language worthy of the sons of God.Bickersteth.

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

PART TWENTY-FOUR:
THE BEGINNING AGAIN OF HUMAN PRESUMPTION

(Gen. 11:1-9)

1. The Story of Babel

And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech. 2 And it came to pass, as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. 3 And they said one to another, Come, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. 4 And they said, Come, let us build us a city, and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5 And Jehovah came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. 6 And Jehovah said, Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language; and this is what they begin to do: and now nothing will be witholden from them, which they purpose to do. 7 Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one anothers speech. 8 So Jehovah scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off building the city. 9 Therefore was the name of it called Babel; because Jehovah did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did Jehovah scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

2. Relation between the Tenth and Eleventh Chapters of Genesis.

The prevailing opinion seems to be that the outspreading of the descendants of Noah, which is the subject-matter of chapter ten, and the beginning of their scattering (dispersion) that is narrated in chapter eleven (the story of Babel), refer to the same event. The latter being included as a description of the manner in which the outspreading originated. It will be recalled that God commanded Adam and his posterity to be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it (Gen. 1:28), and that at the beginning of the rebuilding of the race, after the Flood, He issued the same command to Noah and his progeny (Gen. 9:1; Gen. 9:7). This command undoubtedly envisioned a dispersion leading to the occupancy of the entire earth. But what did man do, after the Flood? He did just the opposite of what God had commanded; instead of spreading abroad over the earth, the race concentrated on a plain in the land of Shinar and started building a city, a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven (Gen. 11:4). What motivated this defiance of God? Let us make us a name, is the answer. Man from the beginning has been trying to play God, to make a name for himself; that is, to set his own authority up above the sovereignty of God. Just as the Devil did, when he started the first rebellion against the Divine government in Heaven, saying to himself, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God. . . . I will make myself like the Most High (Isa. 14:13-14); and just as Mother Eve, moved by the deceptive suggestion that by eating of the forbidden fruit she would be as God, knowing good and evil, took of the fruit thereof and did eat (Gen. 3:6) and so brought sin into the world; so did the progeny of Noah start building a tower to heaven that they might make for themselves a name. (Is it not amazing what human beings will do just to perpetuate a personal or family name after their death?) Man has always persisted in trying to be as God, to put his own will above Gods will, to attain Heaven in his own way and on his own terms instead of Gods way and on Gods terms. His history on earth is the sad story of his burning passion to achieve freedom from all restraints, his determination to prostitute liberty into license under specious claims of academic freedom, personal liberty, and the like. In his present state man is potentially an anarchist, and in our day his drive for anarchyfor the rule of force above that of reasonseems to be more widespread than it has ever been in all human history.

3. The Tower of Babel

(1) Geography. Noahs progeny journeyed eastward, we are told, that is, in an easterly direction. They came to a plain in the land of Shinar and dwelt there. This was the land in which the great cities of Babylon, Erech, and Akkad were situated; hence the region is known in the Bible, as it was known throughout the ancient world, as Babylonia. It is generally held that the people who first occupied this area were Sumerians (who may have come down from the Armenian highlands); hence it came about that Sumer is regarded by many authorities as roughly equivalent to the area called Shinar in the Bible. Shinar is first mentioned in Scripture as the place of the Tower of Babel; in later history it became the place of exile for the Jews (Isa. 11:11, Dan. 1:2).

(2) Nimrod and Babel (a) Kraeling (BA, 46): The story of Nimrod is meaningful in several respects. That the beginning of his kingdom was in Babylonia and that from there he went to Assyria, accurately reflects the fact that the Assyrian civilization was of Babylonian origin; and that he was a great builder and hunter typifies two leading characteristics of the eastern monarchs as such. Tiglathpileser I (1100 B.C.) well illustrates for us what it means to be a mighty hunter before the Lord. A servant goes before his master in executing his commands, and hence a king, too, goes before God as His servant. At the command of his god, says Tiglathpileser, he killed four wild bulls on the Syrian border and ten elephants in the Haran area; at the command of his god he killed 120 lions, hunting on foot, and 800 from his chariot. . . . Hunting was not a mere sport, but part of royaltys obligations. (b) Though not one of the ethnic heads in the Table of Nations, Nimrod is introduced into the register of peoples as the founder of imperialism. Under him, society passed in a large measure from the patriarchal system, in which each separate clan or tribe recognized the sovereignty of its natural head, into that (more abject, or more civilized, depending on the way it is viewed) in which different tribes or nations recognized the governance of one who was not their natural head, but has acquired his ascendancy and dominion by conquest. Eastern tradition has always pictured Nimrod as a gigantic oppressor of the peoples liberties and a rebel against God. Josephus charges him with actually having instigated the building of the Tower of Babel. Attempts have been made to identify him with Marduk, the patron deity of Babylon, and with Gilgamesh, the Babylonian national hero, but of course such identifications are without positive confirmation from any as yet known source. The Bible record positively associates him with Babel, the primitive name for Babylon, but not explicitly with the building of the Tower of Babel, although from the account we have of him such an act of presumption on his part would have been wholly in character.

(3) The Tower. (a) In the story of the Tower of Babel, we have the first mention in the Bible of brick-making and cement work. Tacitus, Strabo, Josephus, and Pliny are unanimous in stating that the brick walls of Babylon were cemented with bitumen (A. V. slime). Layard the archaeologist tells us that the bricks were united so firmly that recent excavators have found it impossible to detach one from the mass. (Clay was used for bricks, and bitumen for mortar). The people involved in building this tower were motivated, we are told in Scripture, by the urge to build something that would reach up to heaven, thus to make them a name for themselves lest they be scattered over the earth; that is, by the building of such a tower to frustrate Gods will for them to replenish the whole earth. This sounds entirely and tragically human. This, we may depend upon it, was no republic of builders, no cooperative association of bricklayers and bricklayers laborers, bent on immortalizing themselves by the work of their own hands. This early effort at centralization, with a huge metropolis as its focus, sprang, we may be quite sure, from the brain of some ambitious potentate, and was baptized, from the very first, in the blood and sweat and misery of toiling millions (Biblical Illustrator, in loco). (b) It should be noted that the tower was built in connection with a city, The difficulty of identifying the site of this undertaking arises chiefly from the fact that the materials of which the tower was built have been removed at various times for the construction of the great cities which have successively replaced it. There is but little question, however, that the city was Babylon itself, and the trend of scholarship at first was to identify the Tower of Babel with the Temple of Belus, described by Herodotus, which is found in the dilapidated remains of the Birs-Nimrud. Kitto has written (CBL) To Nimrod the first foundations of the tower are ascribed; Semiramis enlarged and beautified it; but it appears that the Temple of Bel, in its most renowned state, was not completed until the time of Nebuchadnezzar, who, after the accomplishment of his many conquests, consecrated this superb edifice to the idolatrous object to whom he ascribed his victories. The signal disappointment of the founders of this edifice shows that, from the very first, the entire project was an offense unto God. It seems to have existed, from the outset, in derogation of the Divine glory. Throughout the Scripture, Babel, Babylon, and Baal, are terms which stand for everything opposed to the testimony of God.

(b) Recent and more complete knowledge of Babylonian writing has caused archaeologists to reject the identification suggested in the foregoing paragraph. Kraeling (BA, 54): The lofty Birs Nimrud, the ruins of which are visible far across the plains, was long believed to be the Tower of Babel. Since the site of Babylon was known because of the mound Babil, near modern Hillah, it had to be supposed that the city covered a very large area. But after scholars learned to read and understand the Babylonian writing it was shown that Birs Nimrud was the tower of the city of Borsippa. The tower meant by the Biblical story was, of course, that of Babylon itself. This tower, frequently rebuilt and renewed by the Babylonian kings, was called in Sumerian E-temen-an-ki, House of the Foundation of Heaven and Earth, and the temple in which it stood was called E-sag-ila, House that Lifts up the Head. The tower was leveled to the ground by Alexander the Great, who planned to rebuild it in surpassing glory but who died before he could do so. In the excavations carried on at Babylon by the German Oriental Society, 18991918, the site where it stood was determined.

(c) The temple-tower (ziggurat) was an architectural feature characteristic of Babylonian cities, the center of their worship, and home of the priestly caste. The typical ziggurat is described by Wiseman (NBD, 116) as follows: The base measured 295 x 295 feet and was 108 feet high. Above this were built five platforms, each 2060 feet high, but of diminishing area. The whole was crowned by a temple where the god was thought to descend for intercourse with mankind. Access was by ramps or stairways.

(4) The Name, Babel. In the Genesis account, the name Babel is explained by popular etymology based on a similar Hebrew root, balal, meaning mixing or confusion. Other authorities insist that the name is actually Babylonian, and is composed of two words, Bab-ili, meaning gate of god. Babel, as Babylon throughout its history became a symbol of mans pride and arrogance which led inevitably to his fall. (We have here an echo of the theme of the histories by Herodotus, The Father of History, namely, that Nemesis [Retributive Justice] is certain ultimately to overtake human pride and arrogance. (Job 27, n.): . . . mankind sinned and this was his punishment: it was a sin of overweening pride (Gen. 11:4) like that of our first parents, ch. 3. Unity will be restored only in Christ the savior, cf. the Pentecostal gift of tongues, Act. 2:5-12, and the gathering of all the nations in heaven, Rev. 7:9-10.

4. The Confusion of Tongues. (1) Note the anthropomorphism here, And Jehovah came down to see the city and tower, which the children of men builded (Gen. 11:5). Note the emphasis on the children of menis this irony? (2) Note also the us in Gen. 11:7, Let us go down, and there confound their language, etc. Obviously, the Lord said that within Himself. Does not this statement, as in the other similar passages in the Old Testament (cf. Gen. 1:26, Isa. 6:8) indicate a Divine consilim between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? (3) That human iniquity has its root always in rebelliousness is a theme that pervades the Bible from first to last. By way of contrast, however, the superstition that Gods jealousy is grounded in His fear that man might usurp a measure of His sovereignty was a commonplace throughout the ancient pagan world, and this Divine jealousy was thought of as reaching at times the point of exasperation which brought down upon the sinner the wrath of all the polytheistic deities. (Aristophanes, for example, in one of his great comedies, The Birds, pictures the establishment of a kingdom of the birds, midway between earth and Mount Olympus and the consequent exasperation of the Olympian deities at being able no longer to smell the sweet savor of human sacrifices: cf. Part Twenty-two supra, under Noahs Altar, Gen. 8:21). Modern Biblical critics, those who insist on reading folklore into the Old Testament narratives would have us believe that the Genesis account of Babel is simply an echo of the pagan concept of Divine motivation. The more reasonable view is that the pagan concept was simply a corruption of the fundamental Scripture truth that what happened at Babel was just another instance of mans trying to play God, or to be as God (cf. Satans motivation, 1Ti. 3:6, Isa. 14:13-14, Luk. 10:18; and Eves, Gen. 3:5-6), as a matter of fact a manifestation of mans insolence and disobedience that God could not overlook; to have done so would have been equivalent to His sanctioning human rebelliousness (sin). Again, we find that truth becomes apparent to the unbiased mind only when the whole of Bible teaching is taken into consideration. Gods jealousy is a godly jealousy (2Co. 11:2-3), which has for its end mans own good. True love can never be unconcerned when it is scorned by the one who is loved, and rejected in favor of the way of sin, the broad way that is certain to lead to mans destruction (Mat. 7:13-14). The whole inhabited world is threatened today by mans misuse of the forces he has discovered and unleashed. What the consequence would be if he should ever attain the fullness of knowledge of himself and his physical environment is horrible to contemplate. (4) The action of Noahs descendants, in concentrating on the plain of Shinar, and attempting to build a city and a tower that would reach unto Heaven, displeased God for several reasons: in the first place, it was the beginning of imperialism and hence was in direct defiance of eternal righteousness, as all world empires have been; cf. Mat. 26:52, that is, the individual or the nation that makes force the guiding principle of life will sooner or later encounter, and be destroyed by, superior force; in the second place, it manifested a tendency toward inordinate pride, the very opposite of that humility which should always characterize human intercourse with the Creator and Preserver of mankind; in the third place, it was a case of flagrant disobedience to Gods command, as we have noted: He commanded Noahs progeny to replenish the whole earth, but they did just the oppositethey concentrated on the plain of Shinar and tried to storm the battlements of Heaven, What then did God do? He came down and confounded their language and scattered them abroad upon the face of all the earth. (5) Could it be that there was another aspect of the peoples motivation at Babel, namely, that they had either forgotten Gods promise never again to destroy mankind with the waters of a flood, or probably put no trust in His covenant-promise, and sought by the building of this tower unto Heaven to put themselves out of reach of a repetition of the Deluge?

5. The Problem of Race

The origin of race distinctions continues to be an unsolved problem in anthropology and indeed in all sciences. That all ethnic groups, primitive, prehistoric and historic, can be regarded as integrading varieties of a single species, homo sapiens. seems to be one unavoidable conclusion. That the lines of demarcation between races have again and again been obliterated by interbreeding, is another. The consensus of the scientific world seems to be that three primary races must be recognized: these are the Caucasoid, the Mongoloid, and the Negroid. To these some anthropologists add the Composite (resulting from the hybridization of one or more of the three primary groups or of races derived from them severally) and the Amerindian. Even these classifications leave unsolved the mysteries of such peoples as the native Australians, the Veddoid peoples (of India, Farther India, and the East Indies), the Ainu of northern Japan, and the Polynesians, living within the great island triangle Hawaii-New ZealandEaster Island. (See Kroeber, Anthropology, Ch. 4, published by Harcourt, Brace). The fact remains, however, that the origin of primary racial distinctions and distributions is clouded in obscurity.

The origin of language, and of the diversity of languages, is equally obscure. (See my Genesis, Vol. I, pp. 523525). Science is simply lacking any naturalistic theory of the origin of language: the only two theories thus far advanced, the interjectional and the onomatopoetic, are woefully inadequate, a fact which is recognized by the scientists themselves. It seems obvious that diversification of languages must have gone hand in hand with diversification of ethnic groups. As one anthropologist puts it: Anthropologists are in general agreement that language grew up in correlation with culture. Culture began when speech was present; and from then on, the enrichment of either meant the further development of the other (Kroeber, ibid., 225). And a culture, to be sure, is the culture of a particular ethnic group or people. This boils down to the fact that diversification of language must have taken place along with the separation of peoples from one another. Thus in the final analysis we can account for the origin of diversity of tongues most logically on the basis of supernatural impulse that brought abroad the replenishing of the whole earth by the progeny of Noah, according to the story of what happened to Babel. But we must not overlook the fact that diversification in either case, whether of language or of ethnic groups, certainly points back to an original unity, and so sanctions the truth declared by the great Mars Hill preacher, that God made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth (Act. 17:26).

6. Other Accounts of the Dispersion

The Chaldeans had a tradition, we are told, that the first men, relying on their size and strength, built a tower toward Heaven in the place where Babylon afterward was situated, but that the winds assisted the gods in bringing the building down on the heads of the builders, and that out of the ruins of the tower Babylon was later built, The same tradition informs us that prior to this event, men had spoken the same tongue, but afterward, by the agency of the gods they were made to differ in speech. Plato reports a tradition that in the Golden Age, which is pictured by many of the Greek poets and philosophers, men and animals made use of one common language, but too ambitiously aspiring to immortality, Zeus confounded their speech as a punishment. Inklings of the same event are to be found in the traditions of other peoples. For some strange reason, however, Berosus does not refer to the event. Eusebius quotes Abydenus as saying that not long after the Flood, the ancient race of men were so puffed up with their strength and tallness of stature that they began to despise and contemn the gods, and labored to erect that very lofty tower which is now called Babylon, intending thereby to scale the heavens. But when the building approached the sky, behold, the gods called in the aid of the winds, and by their help overturned the tower, and cast it to the ground! The name of the ruin is still called Babel, because until this time all men had used the same speech; but now there was sent upon them a confusion of many and diverse tongues (Praeo. Ev., ix, 14). Whitelaw (PCG, k66): The diligence of the late George Smith has been rewarded by discovering the fragment of an Assyrian tablet (marked K 3657 in British Museum) containing an account of the building of the tower, in which the gods are represented as being angry at the work and confounding the speech of the builders. Let us remember that corrupted versions of events in the early ages of mankind point directly to the certainty of a true account. Every counterfeit presupposes a genuine.

* * * * *

FOR MEDITATION AND SERMONIZING

1. Let us make for ourselves a name, cried the builders of the Tower of Babel. To make a name for himself was mans objective on the plain of Shinar, and it seems to be his overpowering ambition even to this day. To make a name for himself, Satan rebelled against the Divine government, and man has persistently followed in his steps. History is replete with the names of men who have lived and died and performed mighty works, just to make a name for themselves. For world honor, Alexander of Macedon conquered the peoples of his day and is said to have wept because there were no more to conquer. For world honor Caesar planted the Roman eagle in the mountain fastnesses of Gaul and Germany, and write several volumes in praise of himself and his armies. For the sake of a great name Napoleon swept across the continent of Europe, while the widows sob and the orphans wail furnished the music for his marching hosts. For political baubles, a seat in Congress, a place on the judicial bench, yes, even a paltry county office, men have sold out moral principle, forsaken the church, and crucified Jesus Christ anew. Personal ambition has been the real cause of more wars in human history than any other single factor. What sins have been committed for the sake of world honor! Whether we contemplate man on the plain of Shinar, or on the banks of the Tiber, or in the Hindenburg Line, or before the burning walls of Stalingrad, we find him to be the same worldly-ambitious, self-seeking, God-excluding, rebellious creature. And as it is in the state, so has it been in the history of the Church: Personal ambition has ever been the source of the usurption of authority by a self-constituted clergy, and the consequent growth of hierarchical systems that the destroy of freedom of local churches and even presume to legislate for the state as well as for the denominational world. Man loves power, and to have a name that elicits such modes of address as Reverend, Right Reverend, Very Reverend, etc., is to have power over a fawning constituency. Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

2. Nimrod was probably the first of that type of national heroes (benevolent dictators who become tyrants) to whom the world has always accorded deference. He was a noted, and probably notorious, hunter, builder, ruler; no doubt he was a hero in the eyes of the populace. We are all inclined to hero-worship, said Thomas Carlyle, and he told the truth, but the trouble is that we overrate physical, and underrate moral, heroism. It takes more courage oftentimes to stand for a principle, and to resist a temptation, than to help take a city. We admire the soldier with his khaki and gun and martial tread (as indeed we should if he fights and often dies for a good cause), but we forget about the patient souls who have lived and died for the testimony of Christ: missionaries and preachers of the Cross who have poured out their blood for humanity without expecting anything of this worlds goods in return. Moral heroism is the noblest kind of heroism. Think of Paul, Huss, Savonarola, Wycliffe, Livingstone, and indeed the multitude who have lived for the faith and died for it, including the Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. When we compare the heroism of Nimrod with that of the worlds greatest Hero, the former pales into insignificance. Consider, therefore, the true Hero as He is portrayed by the prophet Isaiah (Isa. 53:1-9). Which kind of heroism do you seek to exalt and prefer to emplate, that of the mighty hunter before Jehovah, or that of the Cross of Calvary?

3. God does not approve the concentration of population. His original command to Adam was to multiply, replenish the earth, and subdue it. Instead of heeding the Divine order, Adams posterity proceeded to build cities and gather into them (cf. Gen. 4:17). The Divine command to Noah and his sons was the same, to multiply, and replenish the earth (Gen. 9:1), not just a part of it, but all of it. God built the earth for man and He wants man to use it in its fullness. Instead of obeying Gods command, however, Noahs progeny followed in the footsteps of their antediluvian forebearers and began to erect cities and to live in them. What an array of cities is mentioned in the tenth chapter of Genesis! Instead of dispersing, the race concentrated, as on the plain of Shinar. Concentration of population, however, has always been productive of increased vice, crime, neurosis, insanity, divorce, suicide, and like social ills. It fosters disregard for the dignity and worth of the individual: in the big city he degenerates into the mass-man. The social ills which press upon us today for solution, such as gangsterism, racketeering, all forms of crime, slum districts, juvenile delinquency, political graft and corruption, breakdown of home life, etc., are largely the consequence of the gathering of population into urban centers. History confirms the fact that city life breeds lust, vice, crime, and sin in all its forms. Babylon, Nineveh, Susa, Persepolis, Memphis, Thebes, Athens, Sparta, Tyre, Sidon, Carthagethe great cities of historydropped from world power into oblivion simply because their iniquities were too great for Jehovah to endure. Where are the hotbeds of crime in our day? Paris, London, Rome, New York, Chicago, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Canton, Tokyo, Istanbul, Cairo, Manila, Buenos Aires, Rio de Janeiro, etc., etc., all the big cities on the face of the earth. We are told by government statisticians that the American people are forsaking rural life rapidly in our time and crowding into the big cities. The automobile has urbanized rural life. The Industrial Revolution has accelerated urbanization. This inevitably will spell tragedy. Disintegration of home life, corruption of social life, and neglect of church life, are the certain consequences to be expected, and they are already upon us. Regardless of racial characteristics or moral standards, wherever and whenever men have concentrated instead of scattering, they have degenerated. Of course God knows this: hence His order was to multiply, and to replenish the whole earth.

4. God has provided a spiritual plan of association for man to counteract the immoral influences to which an ever-increasing population is always subject. Isa. 8:9-10. When men associate themselves, they do it to make a name for themselves in the earth. Hence God does not approve these associations for human ends, especially when they are extended beyond all reasonable limits. When God associates men, however, He does it, not for an earthly, but for a Divine purpose. On the great Day of Pentecost, as recorded in the book of Acts, the Holy Spirit came down and associated men on His own ground, around His center (Christ), and for His purpose (redemption). At Babel there was confusion of tongues, and dispersion; on Pentecost, there was confusion of tongues, and unification! God came to Pentecost to gather humanity under one language (the language of the Spirit, 1Co. 2:6-15), one faith, one hope, one life, one Body of Christ. He came to gather fallen men and women around the glorious Person of a crucified and risen Christ, and to unite them in the one spiritual Body, the Church. Human association breeds wickedness, but this Divine association, through spiritual means, on a spiritual basis, and for a spiritual purpose under God, makes this world a fairly decent place in which to live. And this is the only fellowship that will do so. One of the important arguments for foreign missions is that the world must be Christianized, at least to a considerable extent, or humanity will degenerate into self-destruction. We face the alternative today, as man never faced it before, of Christianizing humanity or of becoming paganized ourselves. Christianity is a religion of this world as well as of the world to come.

5. Babel, mans work, pointed forward to Pentecost, Gods work. When men associate themselves, they do it for selfish purposes; hence God does not look with favor on such associations. Imperialism, whether of king, caste, or class, is an avowed enemy of righteousness (cf. Act. 17:26). When God associates men, He does it for a Divine principle and upon a Divine basis. At Babel, there was confusion of tongues and dispersion. On Pentecost, in Jerusalem, A.D. 30, there was confusion of tongues and unification (Act. 2:1-36). God came on Pentecost through the Holy Spirit to gather humanity into one body, with one hope, one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one language, and one life. Human associations too often breed irreligiousness, but this Divine association, on a spiritual basis, and for a spiritual purpose, makes all those who enter the Covenant partakers of the Divine nature (2Pe. 1:4). We may prate about peace, peace with justice, and the like, until we are blue in the face: the fact is that order, peace, and justice are possible only in Christ (Gal. 3:27, Rom. 8:1, 1Co. 12:13, 2Co. 5:17, Eph. 2:11-22, etc.). The Church is Gods Spiritual Temple which reaches unto Heaven (Eph. 2:19-22, Heb. 12:23, Rev. 11:19).

6. Babylon, in scripture, stands for everything that is opposed to the testimony of God. In the early age of the world, at Babel we have the beginning of organized opposition to Gods command. Thereafter, Babylon stands for organized opposition to Christianity, for organized imperialism in church and state. As Babylon, in Old Testament history, was the unfailing enemy of Jerusalem, so spiritual Babylon, the apostate church, in the history of Christendom, has been the unfailing enemy of the true Church of Christ (cf. the many references to Babylon in the Old Testament; also Rev. 14:8; Rev. 17:5; Rev. 18:10; Rev. 18:21; Gal. 4:26; Rev. 3:12; Rev. 21:2; Rev. 21:10).

* * * * *

REVIEW QUESTIONS ON PART TWENTY-FOUR

1.

Relate the story of Babel as found in Genesis 11.

2.

What is the relation between the tenth and eleventh chapters of Genesis?

3.

What did God tell man to do about occupying the earth after the Flood?

4.

What did man do about this?

5.

What, according to Scripture, prompted Noahs progeny to try to build a tower to Heaven?

6.

How was their attitude indicative of mans attitude in all ages?

7.

Where was the land of Shinar?

8.

What was the connection between Nimrod and Babel?

9.

What probably did the phrase descriptive of Nimrod as a mighty hunter before Jehovah mean?

10.

What change in political structure probably began with Nimrod?

11.

Why do we say that man has always been inclined to hero-worship?

12.

What is probably the correct identification of the Tower of Babel?

13.

State briefly the history of this famous Tower.

14.

State the Hebrew etymology of this name. State the Babylonian etymology of it.

15.

What has Babel always symbolized in human history?

16.

State the Herodotean doctrine of Nemesis. Would you say that it is true?

17.

What was the Babylonian temple-tower called. Give Wisemans description of such a tower.

18.

What is the significance of the us in Gen. 11:7?

19.

What is the pagan view of Gods motivation in such cases as that of the Babel incident?

20.

What motivation does the Biblical account of Babel ascribe to God?

21.

How does this compare with Gods motive in putting down human rebellion in other cases mentioned in Scripture?

22.

How does it compare with Satans rebellion? With Eves decision?

23.

What were the reasons why the peoples attitude at Babel was so displeasing to God?

24.

Does science have any explanation of the origin of race distinctions?

25.

What are considered to be the three primary races?

26.

Name some of the ethnic groups which do not fit into these classifications.

27.

Why do we say that diversification of ethnic groups is accomplished by diversification of language, and vice versa?

28.

What are some of the other accounts of the Dispersion?

29.

What has always been mans besetting ambition, as exemplified by the story of Babel?

30.

Why cannot men be entrusted with power?

31.

Why do men overrate physical heroism and underrate moral heroism?

32.

State the reasons why God does not approve concentration of population.

33.

What social and moral ills always accompany excessive urbanization?

34.

What is Gods spiritual Plan of Association of mankind as distinguished with mans own systems of association?

35.

Contrast Babel and Pentecost.

36.

What does Babylon stand for in Scripture?

37.

Trace the Biblical doctrine of the conflict between Babylon and Jerusalem.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

XI.

(1) The whole earth.That is, all mankind. After giving the connection of the various races of the then known world, consisting of Armenia, the regions watered by the Tigris and Euphrates, the Arabian peninsula, the Nile valley, with the districts closely bordering on the Delta, Palestine, the Levant, and the islands of Cyprus, Rhodes, and Crete; with Lud on his journey to Asia Minor, and the Japhethites breaking their way into Europe through the country between the Caspian and the Black Sea: after this, we go back to the reason of this dispersion, which is found in the confusion of tongues.

Of one language, and of one speech.Literally, of one lip, and of words one: that is, both the pronunciation and the vocabulary were identical. As regards this primitive language, whereas but a few years ago the differences between the Sanscrit and the Semitic tongues were regarded as irreconcilable, recent inquiries tend to show that both have a common basis.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

THE CONFUSION OF TONGUES, Gen 11:1-9.

The narrative here again doubles back upon itself to give the cause of the national divisions described in chap. 10. It reverts to an event which took place in the days of Peleg, (Gen 10:25,) the fourth in descent from Shem . As the unity of the human race, in the strictest sense of the word, is declared by the account of the deluge, which reduced all mankind to a single family from which the whole world was repeopled, so in this chapter the unity of language is declared, and the primal cause of all the lingual diversities is set forth. The diversity of languages is a divine judgment upon human selfishness and pride, leading to manifold national misunderstandings and bloody conflicts, thus sorely hindering intellectual and moral progress, yet also serving as a providential hinderance to sin. Pride had already broken the bond of brotherly unity, and hence the human family, feeling the lack of that inward attraction, sought an outward unity. Thus ever in history is man drawn to his brother by his instincts, yet perpetually repelled from him by selfishness. Hence the vast monarchies which in all ages have striven to consolidate the race, yet have ever been distinguished by luxury, or have exploded in revolution. Hence the hierarchies, which, through bloody centuries, have blindly striven to make good the lack of love’s fusing flame by chaining men in the unity of ecclesiastical despotism. As sin vanishes, and the brotherhood of charity is restored, these differences of language will vanish also, for in the Messianic reign all “people, nations, and languages shall serve Him,” (Dan 7:14,) an epoch foreshadowed by the Pentecostal miracle, which made every man to hear the truth in his own language .

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

1. Whole earth one language one speech Hebrew, as margin, one lip and one words . The whole population of the earth was one lip, and one kind of words . They were one in the manner (lip) and the matter (words) of language, that is, they had the same words for things, and the same modes of expression. There is no tautology, as in the common translation, but there are here two distinct ideas, 1) the same stock of words, and 2) the same inflexions and pronunciation. The Noachian language was probably the immediate parent of the Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac. This primitive language has long ago vanished, but its ruins or debris are scattered everywhere, and can, with more or less certainty, be traced toward a parent formation. There are known at present, according to Kaulen, 860 languages, divided into three great families: 1) isolating, 2) agglutinative, and 3) inflective, each of the last two being regarded as derived from the next preceding; and the science of philology, by studying their manifold analogies and differences, is steadily reducing them to species and genera, all leading up to ultimate unity. The lines of variation all converge toward a distant centre, which, though it may never be scientifically reached, yet is seen by scientific faith. While languages are structurally divided, as above, they are also genealogically divided into Shemitic, Hamitic, and Aryan. This last is a provisional division, having a great number as yet unclassified. We give on pp. 156, 157, Schleicher’s genealogical tree of the Shemitic and Aryan families, the dotted lines representing the dead languages. Of course this represents the present phase of philological knowledge and opinion, and is subject to revision by the advance of science. The Hamitic family has not yet been satisfactorily analysed.

It may be mentioned that the Egyptian is considered by Max Muller as an offshoot of the original Asiatic tongue, before it was broken up into Turanian, Semitic, and Aryan.

One or two illustrations of the unity in this vast variety may suffice. The consonant t, interchanged with its cognates d and th, is the essential element of the second personal pronoun (English thou) in the principal languages of the Shemitic and Aryan families, both as a separate pronoun and as a personal termination. The Hebrew for thou is attah (masc.) and at, (fem.,) thou killest is Katal ta (masc.) and Katal t, (fem.) This consonant conveys the idea of the second person through all the conjugations, or species. The same law is seen in Arabic, Syriac, Ethiopic, and Coptic of the Shemitic family. Look now into the Aryan or Indo-European family, and we find in Sanscrit, tua; in Beng., tui; Russ., tu; Greek, ; Latin and its descendants, tu; German, Dutch, and Danish, du; Gothic and Saxon, thu; English, thou . As a personal ending it is replaced by or used in connexion with its cognate s; thus, for thou art, we have Sanscrit, asi; Russ . , gesi; Greek, ; Latin, es; German, bist, etc . All languages, as far as analyzed, may, according to Max Muller, be reduced to four or five hundred roots, or phonetic types, which form their constituent elements. These sounds are not interjections, nor imitations, but are produced by a power inherent in human nature when the appropriate occasions arise. Man instinctively uses these sounds to express certain conceptions, and they become modified by composition, inflexion, etc., so as to finally produce the infinite varieties of language. Thus the two consonants B (with its cognates P and F) and R, taken together, are instinctively used to express the idea of bearing, or sustaining; take as examples, , , fero, bhri, bairan, baren, , bairn, bear, burden, pario, fructus, fruit, etc .

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

THE SIN OF THE NATIONS (11:1-9).

We are now to be shown why the nations divided up into different languages with the consequent suspicions, hatreds and warfares which resulted. Overall it will be seen as a result of puffed up pride and deliberate rebellion against God. (This chapter is only seen as a new chapter in our Bibles. In the record it was simply a continuation of the narrative). God has not been mentioned in Genesis 10 except as a superlative (Gen 11:9). The nations have grown without God. Now we are to see that the situation in Genesis 10 was caused by Yahweh as a result of man’s sinfulness and rebellion.

Gen 11:1

‘Now the whole earth was of one language and one speech.’

It is noteworthy in Genesis 10 that, although there was no suggestion of splitting nations according to language, reference to differing languages is made in Gen 10:5, Gen 10:20, and Gen 10:31. That was in preparation for this chapter, as was the diversity of nations. Clearly to begin with, all the sons of Noah spoke the same language. The writer is asking, what then was the cause of the later distinctions?

Gen 11:2

‘And it came about as they journeyed East that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and they dwelt there.’

“They” simply refers to those who made the choice to go. There is an interesting comparison here with Cain. It was Cain who left the mainstream of those who worshipped Yahweh and set up a ‘city’, in his case of tents, in order to demonstrate his independence and for mutual protection, and in order to build an alternative lifestyle and civilisation. Here we are clearly to see a group of Noah’s descendants doing the same, but with less excuse for they have not yet been branded as outcasts. They made a free choice. The writer saw their aim as being to find somewhere where they could establish themselves in independence of God.

The land of Shinar is where Nimrod will later come in search of glory and conquest (Gen 10:10). It is the name of Babylonia proper. This will be the beginning of the symbol of Great Babylon which is later seen as the ultimate in rebellion against God (see Revelation 17-18).

Gen 11:3

‘And they said to one another, “Go to, let us make brick and burn them thoroughly.” And they had brick for stone and slime for mortar.’

There is the idea here that they build with perishable materials, material that will not last, although they themselves no doubt saw it as a great advance. This may well be intended to signify the first invention of such building methods, and be seen by the writer as a sign of man’s inventiveness replacing God’s provision. It is part of their rebellion. But he knew that brick and mortar would not have the durability of stone.

Gen 11:4

‘And they said, “Go to, let us build ourselves a city and a tower whose top may reach to heaven, and let us make us a name lest we be scattered abroad on the face of the earth.” ’

The building of a city is a sign of self sufficiency. They are banding together rather than depending on Yahweh. They no longer wish to depend on His protection, but will protect themselves. Great cities were later compared to prostitutes because they offered illicit enjoyment and took men’s minds away from God.

“A tower whose top may reach to heaven”. This is a graphic way of saying a very high tower (see Deu 1:28), but it probably contains in it the idea of connecting with the gods. It was not the height of the tower but the type of tower that was significant. It was almost certainly a ziggurat. These buildings, which became a regular feature of life in Mesopotamia, were stepped buildings which were meant to represent a mountain, and at the top of it was a sanctuary. It was felt that the gods dwelt on mountains, so that provision is being made for them to dwell in the city. Thus this represented idol worship. The tower, like the city itself, is seen by the writer as a further sign of rebellion against Yahweh, replacing Him with more amenable gods who will act according to their will.

“Let us make us a name lest we be scattered abroad.” Their aim was to fill the surrounding people with fear so that they might be free from attack. Their expectation was that their strength in gathering together, and the fearful tower in their midst, which would convince people that the gods were with them, would be sufficient to prevent any attack. Thus they would be safe and would not become scattered. They should have been concerned for the name of Yahweh, but they were only concerned for their own name. This contrasts with Gen 4:26. They have repudiated His name.

Gen 11:5

‘And Yahweh came down to see the city and the tower which the children of men built.’

The words are deliberately ironic. They are telling us that the city and tower were so small that God could not see them from where He was and so had to come down to have a look, and a laugh. ‘He who sits in the heavens will laugh, Yahweh will have them in derision, then will he speak to them in his wrath, and vex them in his sore displeasure’ (Psa 2:4). The whole Psalm is apposite here.

“The children of men”, stressing that they are but human beings after all and not gods. Their pitiable buildings are not a threat to God, only to themselves.

Gen 11:6-7

‘And Yahweh said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have one language, and this is what they begin doing. And now nothing that they purpose to do will be withheld from them. Go to, let us go down and there confound their language that they may not understand one another”s speech”.’

Yahweh would work on the principle of divide and conquer. Having begun in this way these men will continue with greater and greater rebellion, and lead others astray with them. So the best way to limit this was to confound their language so that men would not necessarily understand each other.

“Go to, let us go down —”. Further deliberate irony. These men in their pride, arrogance and self-confidence had encouraged each other twice with ‘go to’ (let us get on with it), now it is Yahweh’s turn to say the third ‘go to’. Three is the number of completeness so that the third encouragement completes the scenario. When He acts it brings things to their conclusion.

“Let US go down –”. Yahweh will take His angels with Him to have a look (see 1Ki 22:19 on; Job 1:6). Compare 1:26 where the angels were first called on to behold the creation of man. Now they must witness his humiliation. These men are to be a spectacle to the heavenly beings who surround the throne of God. They seek to build a mountain to serve gods. Let those who alone populate the heavens behold their folly.

This statement of Yahweh, communicated to some godly man, is the basis of this covenant record. It is a word spoken by Yahweh in a theophany and thus preserved for that reason.

Gen 11:8

‘So Yahweh scattered them abroad from there on the face of all the earth and they ceased building the city.’

We must notice carefully what happened and what did not happen. There is no suggestion that the tower fell down. No cataclysmic event is described. They do not suddenly start to speak different languages.

“Yahweh scattered them abroad”. It is not difficult to see how. Other men, seeing what they are about, attack them before it is too late, as Nimrod would later (10:10). (Alternatively there may have been climactic storms and lightning striking the city which caused them to flee in terror, or disease and pestilence and famine may have caused their flight. Whatever it was they fled never to return). Thus their efforts have proved in vain and they are scattered. The final result will be that their languages will begin to change until they are dialects, and will continue to change even more and establish more advanced systems, until they are unrecognisable to each other.

Gen 11:9

‘Therefore its name was called “Babel” (similar to ‘balel’ – to confound) because Yahweh there confounded the language of all the earth, and from there Yahweh scattered them abroad on the face of the earth.’

Bab – el means literally ‘the gate of god’ (compare Babylonian ‘bab ili’) but the writer makes a play on words to change it to signify confusion. The gate that these men thought would lead them to the gods resulted only in their confusion. So as the writer looks back on what happened he recognises what its final consequences were.

There is a partially parallel account of this event elsewhere where Ur-Nammu (3rd millennium BC) is seen as commanded by the gods to build a ziggurat, but the gods are then offended and throw it down, confusing men’s languages and scattering them over the earth. The throwing down of the tower is clearly an addition to the story suggesting that the Ur Nammu version is later than an earlier account on which Genesis is based. Unlike this story with its deep undertones that was but an example of the irascibility of the gods.

The final result is that mankind is to be scattered and split up. By their act of independence unity and brotherhood is gone. The world is no longer one.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

The Tower of Babel – We know the seventy nations listed in Gen 10:1-32 spoke many languages (see Gen 10:31). Thus, the story of the Tower of Babel (Gen 11:1-9) gives an explanation to the readers of how the descends of Noah listed in chapter 10 became divided into tongues and nations. Therefore, the events of Gen 10:1-32 do not necessarily precede all of the events in Gen 11:1-9. For example, the Tower of Babel probably took place during the time of Peleg when the nations of the earth were divided (Gen 10:25).

Gen 10:25, “And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided ; and his brother’s name was Joktan.”

The Confusion of Tongues – In Gen 11:6 God said that because the people of the earth have one language, nothing could be held back from them which they imagined to do. Therefore, He confused their tongues. How did the confusion of tongues provide a remedy for the halting of man’s accomplishments? If you look at the world today with its several hundred nations and many more cultural groups, you immediately recognize that this division keeps people from working together to accomplish great feats. Because the United States of America is united under one government and one economy, it has been able to achieve the greatest technological advances in the history of mankind. Therefore, when God confused the tongues at the Tower of Babel, it did not limit man’s imaginations, but it did limit man’s ability to come together for the purpose of creating what he had imagined.

We also have to note that for this many people with a common tongue to immediately begin to speak a multitude of languages would mean that the “gift of tongues” had been poured out in a similar way to the day of Pentecost.

Gen 11:1  And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

Gen 11:2  And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there.

Gen 11:2 “a plain in the land of Shinar” – Comments – The “plain in the land of Shinar” is believed to located in the southern part of Mesopotamia, which later became known as Babylon. [166]

[166] R. F. Youngblood, F. F. Bruce, R. K. Harrison, and Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nelson’s New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, rev. ed. (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1995), in Libronix Digital Library System, v. 2.1c [CD-ROM] (Bellingham, WA: Libronix Corp., 2000-2004), “Shinar.”

Gen 11:3  And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter.

Gen 11:3 “they had brick for stone, and slime had they for morter” Word Study on “slime” Strong says the Hebrew word “slime” ( ) (H2564) means, “bitumen (as rising to the surface), slime (-pit).”

Comment – Since there were no stones in this region of the fertile plain, they baked the mud in ovens to make brick. Also located in this region is a form of bitumen, a mineral pitch, which, when hardened, forms a strong cement. John Gill says this bitumen, or slime, has been used here for thousands of years. [167]

[167] John Gill, Genesis, in John Gill’s Expositor, in e-Sword, v. 7.7.7 [CD-ROM] (Franklin, Tennessee: e-Sword, 2000-2005), comments on Genesis 11:3.

Gen 11:4  And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.

Gen 11:4 “whose top may reach unto heaven” Comments – The phrase “whose top may reach unto heaven” is a figurative expression that describes a tower of great height. Note other passages of Scripture that use this expression and were written by the same author.

Deu 1:28, “Whither shall we go up? our brethren have discouraged our heart, saying, The people is greater and taller than we; the cities are great and walled up to heaven ; and moreover we have seen the sons of the Anakims there.”

Deu 9:1, “Hear, O Israel: Thou art to pass over Jordan this day, to go in to possess nations greater and mightier than thyself, cities great and fenced up to heaven ,”

Gen 11:4 “let us make us a name” – Comments – Man chose to place his name as an eternal memorial in Babel; but God has a different plan. The Lord chose to place His name in Zion. Therefore, man was out of God’s will. Man was walking after the imagination of his own heart. In fact, we see in the life of Abraham that God had already chosen Jerusalem and ordained Melchizedek as priest in this holy place as early as 2000 B.C. (Gen 14:18)

Gen 14:18, “And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine: and he was the priest of the most high God.”

The city of Babel is called Babylon in the book of Revelations. This city will again rise out of the ruins to be a great adversary against the Church.

Rev 14:8, “And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.”

Gen 11:4 “lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth” – Comments – The Lord had commanded man to replenish the earth (Gen 1:28). Man was out of God’s will by gathering in one location only.

Gen 1:28, “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth , and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.”

Gen 11:4 Comments – It is interesting to note how man was striving to reach this goal of making himself a great name without the help of God. Yet, Abraham followed the ways of the Lord and received a great name.

Gen 12:2, “And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great ; and thou shalt be a blessing:”

Gen 11:5  And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.

Gen 11:6  And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.

Gen 11:6 “and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do” Comments – God has allowed man to eventually build and develop everything which he has at one time only imagined and dreamed about. For example, the French novelist Jules Verne (1828-1905) wrote of submarines ( Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea [1870]) and spaceships going to the moon ( From the Earth to the Moon [1865]) centuries before these events came to pass long before they were invented. [168]

[168] Thomas H. Goetz, “Jules Verne,” in The World Book Encyclopedia, vol. 20 (Chicago: World Book, Inc., 1994), 362.

Gen 11:7  Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.

Gen 11:7 Comments – In Gen 11:7 man began to speak many different languages. How did God perform this miraculous event with the tongues of men? One similar miracle to compare is the day of Pentecost in Act 2:1-11, where the Lord once again caused the early church to speak in many languages through the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Note the fact that Scripture tells us that the events that man experiences are repeated in history:

Ecc 1:9-10, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.”

Paul tells us in Eph 2:11-22 that the Father’s divine plan in redemption is to break down the dividing walls among nations in order to build a habitation for God to dwell among His people. Thus, He is trying to bring unity back to the people on the earth. The first time God poured out His Spirit at the Tower of Babel was to divide the peoples into nations. The second time was the day of Pentecost and it was intended to bring all nations back into one group making peace.

In Gen 11:1-9 the gift of tongues was intended to divide the people into nations. In contrast, the gift of tongues that was poured out on the day of Pentecost was intended to unite all people into one new man in Christ Jesus. This is why the Jews of the Diaspora clearly understood them speaking in their own language in order for them to hear the Gospel and become one in Christ Jesus.

Gen 11:7 Comments – If God can confound a language, then he can adequately provide the means to spread the Gospel to various languages on the earth today.

Gen 11:8  So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city.

Gen 11:8 Comments – If God had not confounded the tongues of men, and they had maintained one language, then they would have been able to give birth to the inventions that we are just discovering today. But, because men have been divided by war and hatred, knowledge has been slow to increase upon the earth.

Gen 11:9  Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Gen 11:9 “Therefore is the name of it called Babel” Comments – The ISBE says, “Babylon was the Greek name of the city written in the cuneiform script of the Babylonians, bab-ili, which means in Semitic, ‘the gate of god.’ The Hebrews called the country, as well as the city, Babhel. This name they considered came from the root, balal, ‘to confound’.” [169]

[169] A.T. Clay, “Babel,” in International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, ed. James Orr (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., c1915, 1939), in The Sword Project, v. 1.5.11 [CD-ROM] (Temple, AZ: CrossWire Bible Society, 1990-2008).

Gen 11:9 “from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth” – Comments – Note a reference to this event in several passages of Scripture:

Deu 32:8, “When the most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel.”

Act 17:26, “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;”

This scattering was the result of God judging a people for their sins. This event is similar to how God judged the nation of Israel by sending them into captivity by using the Assyrians and Babylonians.

Psa 55:9, “Destroy, O Lord, and divide their tongues: for I have seen violence and strife in the city.”

Note the fact that Scripture tells us that the events that mankind experiences are repeated in history.

Ecc 1:9-10, “The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.”

Gen 11:9 Scripture References – Note Gen 10:10 regarding Nimrod, who founded the kingdom of Babel, “And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel , and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar.”

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

Ten Genealogies (Calling) – The Genealogies of Righteous Men and their Divine Callings (To Be Fruitful and Multiply) – The ten genealogies found within the book of Genesis are structured in a way that traces the seed of righteousness from Adam to Noah to Shem to Abraham to Isaac and to Jacob and the seventy souls that followed him down into Egypt. The book of Genesis closes with the story of the preservation of these seventy souls, leading us into the book of Exodus where we see the creation of the nation of Israel while in Egyptian bondage, which nation of righteousness God will use to be a witness to all nations on earth in His plan of redemption. Thus, we see how the book of Genesis concludes with the origin of the nation of Israel while its first eleven chapters reveal that the God of Israel is in fact that God of all nations and all creation.

The genealogies of the six righteous men in Genesis (Adam, Noah, Shem, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob) are the emphasis in this first book of the Old Testament, with each of their narrative stories opening with a divine commission from God to these men, and closing with the fulfillment of prophetic words concerning the divine commissions. This structure suggests that the author of the book of Genesis wrote under the office of the prophet in that a prophecy is given and fulfilled within each of the genealogies of these six primary patriarchs. Furthermore, all the books of the Old Testament were written by men of God who moved in the office of the prophet, which includes the book of Genesis. We find a reference to the fulfillment of these divine commissions by the patriarchs in Heb 11:1-40. The underlying theme of the Holy Scriptures is God’s plan of redemption for mankind. Thus, the book of Genesis places emphasis upon these men of righteousness because of the role that they play in this divine plan as they fulfilled their divine commissions. This explains why the genealogies of Ishmael (Gen 25:12-18) and of Esau (Gen 36:1-43) are relatively brief, because God does not discuss the destinies of these two men in the book of Genesis. These two men were not men of righteousness, for they missed their destinies because of sin. Ishmael persecuted Isaac and Esau sold his birthright. However, it helps us to understand that God has blessed Ishmael and Esau because of Abraham although the seed of the Messiah and our redemption does not pass through their lineage. Prophecies were given to Ishmael and Esau by their fathers, and their genealogies testify to the fulfillment of these prophecies. There were six righteous men did fulfill their destinies in order to preserve a righteous seed so that God could create a righteous nation from the fruit of their loins. Illustration As a young schoolchild learning to read, I would check out biographies of famous men from the library, take them home and read them as a part of class assignments. The lives of these men stirred me up and placed a desire within me to accomplish something great for mankind as did these men. In like manner, the patriarchs of the genealogies in Genesis are designed to stir up our faith in God and encourage us to walk in their footsteps in obedience to God.

The first five genealogies in the book of Genesis bring redemptive history to the place of identifying seventy nations listed in the Table of Nations. The next five genealogies focus upon the origin of the nation of Israel and its patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

There is much more history and events that took place surrounding these individuals emphasized in the book of Genesis, which can be found in other ancient Jewish writings, such as The Book of Jubilees. However, the Holy Scriptures and the book of Genesis focus upon the particular events that shaped God’s plan of redemption through the procreation of men of righteousness. Thus, it was unnecessary to include many of these historical events that were irrelevant to God’s plan of redemption.

In addition, if we see that the ten genealogies contained within the book of Genesis show to us the seed of righteousness that God has preserved in order to fulfill His promise that the “seed of woman” would bruise the serpent’s head in Gen 3:15, then we must understand that each of these men of righteousness had a particular calling, destiny, and purpose for their lives. We can find within each of these genealogies the destiny of each of these men of God, for each one of them fulfilled their destiny. These individual destinies are mentioned at the beginning of each of their genealogies.

It is important for us to search these passages of Scripture and learn how each of these men fulfilled their destiny in order that we can better understand that God has a destiny and a purpose for each of His children as He continues to work out His divine plan of redemption among the children of men. This means that He has a destiny for you and me. Thus, these stories will show us how other men fulfilled their destinies and help us learn how to fulfill our destiny. The fact that there are ten callings in the book of Genesis, and since the number “10” represents the concept of countless, many, or numerous, we should understand that God calls out men in each subsequent generation until God’s plan of redemption is complete.

We can even examine the meanings of each of their names in order to determine their destiny, which was determined for them from a child. Adam’s name means “ruddy, i.e. a human being” ( Strong), for it was his destiny to begin the human race. Noah’s name means, “rest” ( Strong). His destiny was to build the ark and save a remnant of mankind so that God could restore peace and rest to the fallen human race. God changed Abram’s name to Abraham, meaning, “father of a multitude” ( Strong), because his destiny was to live in the land of Canaan and believe God for a son of promise so that his seed would become fruitful and multiply and take dominion over the earth. Isaac’s name means, “laughter” ( Strong) because he was the child of promise. His destiny was to father two nations, believing that the elder would serve the younger. Isaac overcame the obstacles that hindered the possession of the land, such as barrenness and the threat of his enemies in order to father two nations, Israel and Esau. Jacob’s name was changed to Israel, which means “he will rule as God” ( Strong), because of his ability to prevail over his brother Esau and receive his father’s blessings, and because he prevailed over the angel in order to preserve his posterity, which was the procreation of twelve sons who later multiplied into the twelve tribes of Israel. Thus, his ability to prevail against all odds and father twelve righteous seeds earned him his name as one who prevailed with God’s plan of being fruitful and multiplying seeds of righteousness.

In order for God’s plan to be fulfilled in each of the lives of these patriarchs, they were commanded to be fruitful and multiply. It was God’s plan that the fruit of each man was to be a godly seed, a seed of righteousness. It was because of the Fall that unrighteous seed was produced. This ungodly offspring was not then nor is it today God’s plan for mankind.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Generation of the Heavens and the Earth Gen 2:4 to Gen 4:26

a) The Creation of Man Gen 2:4-25

b) The Fall Gen 3:1-24

c) Cain and Abel Gen 4:1-26

2. The Generation of Adam Gen 5:1 to Gen 6:8

3. The Generation of Noah Gen 6:9 to Gen 9:29

4. The Generation of the Sons of Noah Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:9

5. The Generation of Shem Gen 11:10-26

6. The Generation of Terah (& Abraham) Gen 11:27 to Gen 25:11

7. The Generation Ishmael Gen 25:12-18

8. The Generation of Isaac Gen 25:19 to Gen 35:29

9. The Generation of Esau Gen 36:1-43

10. The Generation of Jacob Gen 37:1 to Gen 50:26

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The Genealogy of the Sons of Noah – The fourth genealogy in the book of Genesis is entitled “The Genealogy of the Sons of Noah” (Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:9), which tells us how the sons of Noah fulfilled the divine commission to be fruitful and multiply. The previous genealogy of Noah tells us that the calling and destiny of Noah was to multiply and to replenish the earth (Gen 9:1). This genealogy shows the fulfillment of this commission in his sons. This passage of Scripture contains the Table of Nations, which show us that God divided mankind up into seventy nations in order to fulfill this commission. This table lists the genealogies of the sons of Noah, but only one of them would carry the seed of righteousness, which was Shem. All of their genealogies are listed briefly in this table because Noah had favor with God, so that God’s blessings would come upon his children; however, only Shem fulfilled his divine destiny that was a part of God’s eternal plan of redemption in that the seed of righteousness descended from him through Abraham. The other sons of Noah failed to fulfill their destinies, bearing wicked seed that continued the seed of corruption upon the earth. After reading in the Table of Nations concerning the seventy nations that were divided by their families and their tongues (Gen 10:1-32), we read the story of Babel of how the tongues of man were divided, which caused in the division of the nations (Gen 11:1-9). The Genealogy of the Sons of Noah closes by saying that God spread the seventy nations upon the earth (Gen 11:9), which would be to fulfill the divine commission for mankind to be fruitful and multiply.

Outline Here is a proposed outline:

1. The Table of Nations Gen 10:1-32

2. The Tower of Babel Gen 11:1-9

The Origin of the Nations Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:9 describes the origins of the nations as we know them today. After Gen 1:1 to Gen 9:29 takes us through the series of events that shaped characteristics of the heavens and the earth as we know them today, which are listed as “seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease” (Gen 8:22), we are given a passage of Scripture that explains the origin of the seventy nations speaking distinct tongues that make up prophetic history until the new heavens and earth are created in eternity (Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:9). This passage will serve as a foundation for the next section in the book of Genesis, which explains the origin of the nation of Israel that God calls out to create a righteous people to repopulate the earth (Gen 11:10 to Gen 50:26).

The Importance of Possessing Land – Gen 10:1 to Gen 11:9 identifies the names of seventy nations of the earth which were divided at the Tower of Babel. The Scriptures will refer to them from now until the book of Revelation as “the Gentiles” in contrast to the nation of Israel, which has yet to be established from the loins of Abraham whose ancestor is Heber. It is important to note that from God’s perspective the nation of Israel will then take center stage throughout the history of mankind, except for the two thousand period of Church history. This is why Paul was able to identify three distinct people groups that exist on earth from a divine perspective, which is Israel, the Church and the Gentiles (1Co 10:32).

1Co 10:32, “Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God:”

The Importance of Land Ownership – If we look at the existing boundaries of these 70 nations, we immediately begin to understand their economic importance. Each of these nations departed from the Tower of Babel with an equal opportunity for prosperity. We know that some countries inherited more productive land than others. A country’s wealth is determined by its ability to subdue its land and exploit its resources. A drive into Brownsville, Texas is a clear illustration of this point. Part of this town is in the U.S.A. and part of it is in Mexico. As you pass from Texas through customs and into Mexico, you go from prosperity to poverty. The boundary fence running through this border city determines whether people are wealthy or poor, based upon the divine blessings upon their nation.

The Lord was so accurate regarding the importance of His people owning real estate that He had Joshua divide the Promised Land by lot to the twelve tribes. These tribes divided their lots up by clans, families and individuals. Without land ownership a person would have no hope for prosperity. This is why God gave the tribes certain rules on how to provide for the Levites since they had no land inheritance, but were scattered throughout the other tribes. When a person fell into poverty, he sold his land and served as a slave to others with no hope of obtaining prosperity. So, under the Mosaic Law, land ownership was carefully regulated because it held the keys to one’s potential for prosperity.

I have lived in East Africa for a number of years now. As I observe wise investors in a country where corruption is widespread and inflation is high, it appears that the only sure place for someone to invest their money is in land. Having come from the U.S.A. with a strong economy, I felt that there were many secure investment opportunities; but in developing countries, land becomes the only secure investment. This helps illustrate the importance of these nations having their own secure boundaries, because this was a major factor in determining their future prosperity.

We read a statement in Ecc 5:9 “Moreover the profit of the earth is for all: the king himself is served by the field.” This tells us that through the principles of economics, taxes eventually make their way into the hands of the king. From the laborer all of the way up to the king, every person in a society experiences the blessings from the field. Note that everything that you see around you, buildings, cars, furniture, even our physical bodies, comes from the ground. These minerals are the building blocks of materials and even life. So land is important and the boundaries of nations and the ownership and control of real estate plays a leading role in the conflicts and wars that are fought throughout the Scriptures between these seventy nations.

Fuente: Everett’s Study Notes on the Holy Scriptures

The building of the Tower

v. 1. And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech. Much of the explanatory matter in the preceding Chapter, as well as the mention of various languages, belongs to a later period of history, being indicated there merely for the sake of offering a complete picture. The story which is now told belongs to a period only about one hundred years after the Flood, if we may assume that it occurred at the time when Peleg was born. At that time all the people of the world still had but one speech and one language.

v. 2. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. From the highlands of the Ararat range the survivors of the Flood and their families moved down, by degrees, in an easterly direction until they reached the great plain where the Euphrates and Tigris rivers flow. It is a rich and fertile plain, or was in those days, and the people were constrained to give up their nomadic form of living and establish permanent sites for homes.

v. 3. And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. Not only Ham and Canaan had meanwhile forsaken the religion of Noah, but other members of his family had likewise turned from the living God to the vanity and pride of their own imagination. This is indicated by the manner of their speech in proposing to build a city and a tower.

v. 4. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. Their plans were made with care. Instead of the usual sun-dried brick they proposed to use burnt brick, which would be able to withstand the ravages of the weather so much the better. And instead of merely laying the bricks loosely, they planned to set them firmly by the use of asphalt, which is found in large quantities near the ruins of Babylon. Just what motive prompted them to undertake the building of such a city and tower whose top should reach to the sky is shown in their words: And let us make for us a name, lest we be scattered over the face of the whole earth. An arrogant, blasphemous pride was here combined with a cringing fear of the avenging justice of the Lord. They were full of enmity toward God; their purpose was to defy His almighty power and to make this city with its tower the center of the world, to which they might return even if it should happen that the Lord would scatter them into the four winds.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

EXPOSITION

Gen 11:1

And the whole earth. I.e. the entire population of the globe, and not simply the inhabitants of the land of Shinar (Ingiis; cf. Gen 9:29). Was. Prior to the dispersion spoken of in the preceding chapter, though obviously it may have been subsequent to that event, if, as the above-named author believes, the present paragraph refers to the Shemites alone. Of one language. Literally, of one lip, i.e. one articulation, or one way of pronouncing their vocables. And of one speech. Literally, one (kind of) words, i.e. the matter as well as the form of human speech was the same. The primitive language was believed by the Rabbins, the Fathers, and the older theologians to be Hebrew; but Keil declares this view to be utterly untenable. Bleek shows that the family of Abraham spoke in Aramaic (cf. Jegar-sahadutha, Gen 31:47), and that the patriarch himself acquired Hebrew from the Canaanites, who may themselves have adopted it from the early Semites whom they displace& While regarding neither the Aramaic, Hebrew, nor Arabic as the original tongue of mankind, he thinks the Hebrew approaches nearest the primitive Semite language out of which all three were developed.

Gen 11:2

And it came to pass, as they journeyed. Literally, in their journeyings. The root (, to pull up, as, e.g; the stakes of a tent when a camp moves, Isa 33:20) suggests the idea of the migration of nomadic hordes (cf. Gen 12:9; Gen 33:17). From the east. Ab oriente (Ancient Versions, Calvin, et alii), meaning either that they started from Armenia, which was in the east respectu terrae Canaan (Luther), or from that portion of the Assyrian empire which was east of the Tigris, and called Orientalis, as distinguished from the Occidentalis on the west (Bochart); or that they first traveled westwards, following the direction of the Euphrates in one of its upper branches (Bush); or that, having roamed to the east of Shinar, they ultimately returned occidentem versus (Junius). The phrase, however, is admitted to be more correctly rendered ad orientem (Drusius, Lange, Keil, Murphy), as in Gen 13:11. Kalisch interprets generally in oriente, agreeing with Luther that the migrations are viewed by the writer as taking place in the east; while T. Lewis prefers to read from one front part (the original meaning of kedem) to anotheronwards. That they found a plain ; not a valley between mountain ranges, as in Deu 8:7; Deu 11:11; Psa 104:8, but a widely-extended plain (, LXX.), like that in which Babylon was situated (Herod; lib. 1:178, ; cf. Strabo, lib. 2.109). In the land of Shinar. Babylonia (cf. Gen 10:10). The derivation of the term is unknown (Gesenius), though it probably meant the land of the two rivers (Alford). Its absence from ancient monuments (Rawlinson) suggests that it was the Jewish name for Chaldaea. And they dwelt there.

Gen 11:3

And they said one to another. Literally, a man to his neighbor; (LXX.). Go to. A hortatory expletivecome on (Anglice). Let us make brick. Nilbenah lebenim; literally, let us brick bricks; (LXX.); laterifecimus lateres (Calvin); lebenah (from laban, to be white), being so called from the white and chalky day of which bricks were made. And burn them thoroughly. Literally, burn them to a burning; venisrephah lisrephah, a second alliteration, which, however, the LXX. fails to reproduce. Bricks were usually sun-dried; these, being designed to be more durable, were to be calcined through the agency of fire, a proof that the tower-builders were acquainted with the art of brick-making. And they hadliterally, and there was to themebrick for stone. Chiefly because of the necessities of the place, the alluvial plain of Babylon being void of stones and full of clay; a proof of the greatness of their crime, seeing they were induced to undertake the work non facilitate operis, nec aliis commodis, quae se ad manum offerrent (Calvin); scarcely because bricks would better endure fire than would stones, the second destruction of the world by fire rather than water being by this time a common expectation (Com a Lapide). Josephus, ‘Ant; lib. 1. cp. 4; Heroin, lib. 1. cp. 179; Justin, lib. 1. cp. 2; Ovid, ‘ Metam.,’ 4.4; and Aristoph. in Avibus ( ), all attest that the walls of Babylon were built of brick. The mention of the circumstance that brick was used instead of stone “indicates a writer belonging to a country and an age in which stone buildings were familiar, and therefore not to Babylonia” (Murphy). And slime. Chemer, from chamar, to boil up; (LXX.); the bitumen which boils up from subterranean fountains like oil or hot pitch in the vicinity of Babylon, and also near the Dead Sea (lacus asphaltites). Tacitus, ‘ Hist.,’ 5.6; Strabo, 16. p. 743; Herod; lib. h c. 179; Josephus, ‘Antiq.,’ lib. 1. c. 41 Pliny, lib. 35. 100. 15; Vitruvius, lib. 8. c. 3, are unanimous in declaring that the brick walls of Babylon were cemented with bitumen. Layard testifies that so firmly have the bricks been united that it is almost impossible to detach one from the mass. Had they. Literally, was to them. For mortar. Chomer. The third instance of alliteration in the present verse; possibly designed by the writer to represent the enthusiasm of the builders.

Gen 11:4

And they said. Being impelled by their success in making bricks for their dwellings (Lange), though the resolution to be mentioned may have been the cause of their brick-making (Bush). Go to, let us build us a city. Cf. Gen 4:17, which represents Cain as the first city builder. And a tower. Not as a distinct erection, but as forming a part, as it were the Acre-polls, of the city (Bochart). Whose top may reach unto heaven. Literally, and his head in the heavens, a hyperbolical expression for a tower of great height, as in Deu 1:28; Deu 9:1 (cf. Homer, ‘Odys,’ 5:239, }n ou)ranomh&khj). This tower is commonly identified with the temple of Belus, which Herodotus describes as being quadrangular (two stadia each way), and having gates of brass, with a solid tower in the middle, consisting of eight sections, each a stadium in height, placed one above another, ascended by a spiral staircase, and having in the top section a spacious temple with a golden table and a well-furnished bed. Partially destroyed by Xerxes, it was attempted unsuccessfully to be rebuilt by Alexander the Great; but the remaining portion of the edifice was known to be in existence five centuries later, and was sufficiently imposing to be recognized as the temple of Belus (Pliny, 6.30). The site of this ancient tower is supposed by George Smith to be covered by the ruin “Babil,” a square mound about 200 yards each way, in the north of the city; and that of the tower of Babel to be occupied by the ruin Birs-Nimrod (situated six miles south-west of Hillah, which is about forty miles west of Bagdad), a tower consisting of seven stages, said by inscriptions on cylinders extracted from the ruin to have been “the Temple of the Seven Planets, which had been partially built by a former king of Babylon, and, having fallen into decay, was restored and completed by Nebuchadnezzar”. It is, however, prima facie, unlikely that either Babil or Birs-Nimrod is the exact site of Babel. The original building was never finished, and may not have attained any great dimensions. Perhaps the most that can be said is that these existing mounds enable us to picture what sort of erection the tower of Babel was to be. And let us make a name, ; neither an idol temple, being = God, which it never is without the article, cf. Le Deu 24:11 (Jewish writers); nor a monument, as in 2Sa 8:13 (Clericus); nor a metropolis, reading instead of , as in 2Sa 20:19 (Clericus); nor a tower that might serve as a sign to guide the wandering nomads and guard them against getting lost when spread abroad with their flocks, as in 2Sa 8:13; Isa 55:13 (Perizonius, Dathe, Ilgen); but a name, a reputation, as in 2Sa 8:13; Isa 63:12, Isa 63:14; Jer 32:20; Dan 9:15 (Luther, Calvin, Rosenmller, Keil, Lange, Murphy, Wordsworth, Kalisch). This was the first impelling motive to the erection of the city and tower. The offspring of ambition, it was designed to spread abroad their fame usque ad ultimos terrarum fines (Calvin). According to Philo, each man wrote his name upon a brick before he built it in. The second was to establish a rallying point that might serve to maintain their unity. Lest we be scattered abroad. Lestantequam, , before that, as if anticipating that the continuous increase of population would necessitate their dispersion (LXX; Vulgute), or as if determined to distinguish themselves before surrendering to the Divine command to spread themselves abroad (Luther); but the more exact rendering of is , ne, lest, introducing an apodosis expressive of something to be avoided by a preceding action, but the execution of the Divine purpose intimated in Gen 9:1, and perhaps recalled to their remembrance by Noah (Usher), or by Sham (Wordsworth), or by Eber (Candlish); and what the builders aimed at was resistance to the Divine will. Upon the face of the whole earth. Over the entire surface of the globe, and not simply over the land of Shiner (Inglis), or over the immediate region in which they dwelt (Clericus,. Dathe, et alii, ut supra).

Gen 11:5

And the Lord came down. Not in visible form, as in Exo 19:20; Exo 34:5 (Onkelos), but “effectu ostendens se propin quiorem quem absentem esse judicabant“ (Poole), an anthropomorphism (cf. Gen 18:21; Psa 144:5). “It is measure for measure (par pari). Let us build up, say they, and scale the heavens. Let us go down, says God, and defeat their impious thought” (Rabbi Schelomo, quoted by T. Lewis). To see (with a view to judicial action) the city and the tower which the children of mensons of Adam; neither the posterity of Cain, i.e. the Hamites exclusively, as the Sethites were called sons of God, Gen 6:2, nor wicked men in general (Junius, Piscator), imitators of Adam, i.e. rebellantes Deo (Mode, Lyre), since then the Shemites would not have been participators in the undertaking (Drusius), which some think, to have been their work exclusively (Inglis); but the members of the human race, or at least their leadersbuilded.

Gen 11:6

And the Lord saidwithin himself, and to himself (vide Gen 11:8); expressive of the formation of a Divine resolution (cf. Gen 6:7)Behold, the people, from root signifying to bind together, expresses the idea of association; , from a root signifying to swell (Lange), to flow together (Gesenius), to gather together (Furst), conveys the notion of a confluxus hominum. T. Lewis connects it with the sense of interiority, or exclusion, which is common in the Chaldee and Syriacis one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do. One race, one tongue, one purpose. The words indicate unity of effort, as well as concentration of design, on the part of the builders, and a certain measure of success in the achievement of their work. And now nothing will be restrained from them. Literally, there will not be cut off from them anything; (LXX.); non desistent a cogitationibus suis (Vulgate, Luther); i.e. nothing will prove too hard for their dating. It can hardly imply that their impious design was on the eve of completion. Which they have imagined to do.

Gen 11:7

Go to. An ironical contrast to the “Go to” of the builders (Lange). Let us (cf. Gen 1:26) go down, and there confound their language (vide infra, Gen 11:9), that they may not understand (literally, hear; so Gen 42:23; Isa 36:11; 1Co 14:2) one another’s speech. Not referring to individuals (singuli homines), since then society were impossible, but to families or nations (singulae cognationes), which each had its own tongue (Poole).

Gen 11:8

So (literally, and) the Lord scattered them abroad (as the result of the confusion of their speech) upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. I.e. as a united community, which does not preclude the idea of the Babylonians subsequently finishing the structure.

Gen 11:9

Therefore is the name of it called Babel. For Balbel, confusion (, LXX; Josephus), from Balal, to confound; the derivation given by the sacred writer in the following clause (cf. for the elision of the letter l, totaphah for tophtaphah, Exo 13:16, and cochav for covcav, Gen 37:9). Other derivations suggested are Bab-Bel, the gate or court of Bolus (Eichhorn, Lange), an explanation of the term which Furst thinks not impossible, and Kalisch declares “can scarcely be overlooked;” and Babil, the gate of God (Rosenmller, Gesenius, Colenso); but the first is based upon a purely mythical personage, Bel, the imaginary founder of the city; and the second, if even it were supported by evidence, which it is not, is not so likely as that given by Moses. Because the Lord did there confoundhow is not explained, but has been conjectured to be by an entirely inward process, viz; changing the ideas associated with words (Koppen); by a process wholly outward, viz.. an alteration of the mode of pronouncing words (Hoffman), though more probably by both (Keil), or possibly by the first insensibly leading to the secondthe language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them. As the result not simply of their growing discord, dissensio animorum, per quam factum sit, ut qui turrem struehant distracti sint in contraria studia et consilia (Vitringa); but chiefly of their diverging tonguesa statement which is supposed to conflict with the findings of modem philology, that the existing differences of language among mankind are the result of slow and gradual changes brought about by the operation of natural causes, such as the influence of locality in changing and of time in corrupting human speech. But

(1) modern philology has as yet only succeeded in explaining the growth of what might be called the sub-modifications of human speech, and is confessedly unable to account for what appears to be its main division into a Shemitic, an Aryan, and a Turanian tongue, which may have been produced in the sudden and miraculous way described; and

(2) nothing prevents us from regarding the two events, the confusion of tongues and the dispersion of the nations, as occurring simultaneously, and even acting and reacting on each other. As the tribes parted, their speech would diverge, and, on the other hand, as the tongues differed, those who spoke the same or cognate dialects would draw together and draw apart from the rest. We may even suppose that, prior to the building of Babel, if any of the human family had begun to spread themselves abroad upon the surface of the globe, a slight diversity in human speech had begun to show itself; and the truthfulness of the narrative will in no wise be endangered by admitting that the Divine interposition at Babel may have consisted in quickening a natural process which had already commenced to operate; nay, we are rather warranted to conclude that the whole work of subdividing human speech was not compressed into a moment of time, but, after receiving this special impulse, was left to develop and complete itself as the nations wandered farther and ever farther from the plains of Shinar, and ‘Quarry on Genesis,’ pp. 195-206).

Chaldaean Legend of the Tower of Babel

Berosus, indeed, does not refer to it, and early writers are obliged to have recourse to somewhat doubtful authorities to confirm it. Eusebius, e.g; quotes Abydenus as saying that “not long after the Flood, the ancient race of men were so puffed up with their strength and tallness of stature that they began to despise and contemn the gods, and labored to erect that very lofty tower which is now called Babylon, intending thereby to scale the heavens. But when the building approached the sky, behold, the gods called in the aid of the winds, and by their help overturned the tower, and cast it to the ground! The name of the ruin is still called Babel, because until this time all men had used the same speech; but now there was sent upon them a confusion of many and diverse tongues” (‘Praep. Ev.,’ 9.14). But the diligence of the late George Smith has been rewarded by discovering the fragment of an Assyrian tablet containing an account of the building of the tower, in which the gods are represented as being angry at the work and confounding the speech of the builders. In col. 1; lines 5 and 6 (according to W. St. C. Boscawen’s translation) run

“Babylon corruptly to sin went, and
Small and great mingled on the mound;”

while in col 2; lines 12, 13, 14, 15, are

“In his anger also the secret counsel he poured out

To scatter abroad his face he set

He gave a command to make strange their speech

their progress he impeded.”

HOMILETICS

Gen 11:4

The tower-builders of Babel.

I. THE IMPIETY OF THEIR DESIGN.

1. Ambition. They were desirous of achieving fame, or “a name” for themselves. Whether in this there was a covert sneer at the exaltation promised to the Shemites, or simply a display of that lust of glory which natively resides within the fallen heart, it was essentially a guilty purpose by which they were impelled. In only one direction is ambition perfectly legitimate, viz; in the direction of moral and spiritual goodness, as distinguished from temporal and material greatness (cf. 1Co 12:31). Only then may the passion for glory be exuberantly gratified, when its object is the living God instead of puny and unworthy self (cf. Jer 9:23, Jer 9:24; 1Co 1:29, 1Co 1:31).

2. Rebellion. Setting its head among the clouds, “exalting its throne above the stars,” it was designed to be an act of insolent defiance to the will of Heaven. The city and the tower of Babel had their origin in deliberate, determined, enthusiastic, exulting hostility to the Divine purpose that they should spread themselves abroad over the face of the whole earth. And herein lies the essence Of all impiety: whatever thought, counsel, word, or work derives its inspiration, be it only in an infinitesimal degree, from antagonism to the mind of God is sin. Holiness is but another name for obedience.

II. THE MAGNITUDE OF THEIR ENTERPRISE. The undertaking of the tower-builders was

1. Sublimely conceived. The city was to ward off invasion from without, and to counteract disruption from within. Gathering men of a common tongue into a common residence, engaging them in common pursuits, and providing them with common interests was the sure way to make them strong. If this was the creative idea out of which cities sprung, the Cainites, if not pious, must at least have been possessed of genius. Then the tower was to touch the skies. Unscientific perhaps, but scarcely irrational; “an undertaking not of savages, but of men possessed with the idea of somehow getting above nature.” And though certainly to aspire after such supremacy over nature in the spirit of a godless science which recognizes no power or authority superior to itself was the very sin of these Babelites, yet nothing more convincingly attests the essential greatness of man than the ever-widening control which science is enabling him to assert over the forces of matter.

2. Hopefully begun. The builders were united in their language and purpose. The place was convenient for the proposed erection. The most complete preparations were made for the structure. The work was commenced with determination and amid universal enthusiasm. It had all the conditions of success, humanly speakingone mind, one heart, one hand.

3. Suddenly abandoned. “They left off to build the city.” So the most prosperous undertakings often terminate in miserable failure. The mighty enterprise was mysteriously frustrated. So have all such wicked combinations in times past been overthrown. Witness the great world empires of Babylon, Persia, Greece, Rome. So in the end will the great mystery of iniquity, of which that early Babel was the first type.

III. THE INSPECTION OF THEIR WORK.

1. No work of man can hope to escape the eye of God. Even now he is minutely acquainted with the thoughts, and words, and works, and ways of every individual on the earth (Pro 15:3; Heb 4:13), while there is a day coming when “there is nothing covered that shall not be revealed” (Mat 10:26).

2. Every work of man shall be judged at the bar of God (Ecc 12:14; 1Co 3:13). The Divine verdict upon human undertakings will often strangely conflict with the judgments of men.

IV. THE CONCLUSION OF THEIR TONGUES.

1. As a fact in the experience of the builders, it was

(1) Unchallengeable. They could not understand one another, so that they could not doubt that a change of some kind had passed upon their speech; and observation convinces us that as men have now a variety of tongues, something must have broken up the original unity of speech.

(2) mysterious. It is not likely that these primitive builders understood how their language had been transmuted. Modem philology has no certain word to utter upon the subject yet.

(3) Supernatural. It was effected by the immediate agency of God. If even natural causes had begun to operate, they were quickened by the Divine action. Believers in a God who made the tongue of man should have no difficulty in believing in a God who changed the tongue of man.

2. As a judgment on the persons of the builders, it was

(1) Unexpected in its coming, as are all God’s judgments, like the Flood and like the coming of the Son of man.

(2) Deserved by its subjects. Caught, as it were, in the very act of insubordination, guilty of nothing short of treason against the King of heaven, they were visited with summary and condign chastisement. So are all God’s punishments richly merited by those on whom they fall.

(3) Appropriate in its character. It was fitting that they who had abused their oneness of speech, which was designed for their good, to keep them in the Church, should be punished with variety of tongues.

(4) Effectual in its design. Sent to scatter them abroad, it succeeded in its aim. Man’s designs often fail; God’s never.

V. THE DISPERSION OF THEIR RANKS.

1. Judicial in its character. In its incidence on the builders it wore a punitive aspect. Providences that are full of blessings for the good are always laden with curses to the wicked.

2. Beneficial in its purpose. The scattering of the earth’s population over the surface of the globe was originally intended for what it has eventually turned out to be, a blessing for the race.

3. Unlimited in its extent. Though the original dispersion could not have carried the tribes to any remote distances from Shinar, the process then begun was intended not to rest until the earth was fully occupied by the children of men.

VI. THE MEMORIAL OF THEIR FOLLY. This was

1. Exceedingly expressive. The unfinished tower was designated Babel, or Confusion. It is well that things should be called by their right names. The name of Babel was an epitome of the foolish aim and end of the builders. The world is full of such monuments of folly.

2. Self-affixed. So God often compels “men of corrupt minds” and “reprobate concerning the faith” not only to manifest, but also to publish, their own folly.

3. Long–enduring. It continued to be known as Babel in the days of Moses and long afteran emblem of that shame which shall eventually be the portion of all the wicked.

Learn

1. The sinfulness of ambition.

2. The folly of attempting to resist God.

3. The power of God in carrying out his purposes.

4. The mercy of God in dividing the nations.

5. The ability of God to re-gather the divided nations of the earth.

HOMILIES BY R.A. REDFORD

Gen 11:1-9

Order brought forth.

We are now to trace the rise of the kingdom of God among the nations. Already in the case of Nimrod, the mighty hunter before the Lord, that is, by permission of Divine providence, the antagonism between the kingdom of God and the kingdoms of this world has been symbolized. Now we find the concentration of the world’s rebellion and ungodliness in the false city, type of the worldly power throughout the Scriptures. It is on the plain of Shinar to which the early migration from the East directed the course of mankind. We are not told at what time the settlement in Shinar took place. As the account of the confusion of tongues is introduced between the larger genealogy and the lesser, we may infer that its object is to account for the spread of nations. Whether we take this Babel to be Nimrod’s Babel or an earlier one is of very little consequence. The whole narrative is full of Divine significance. Notice

I. MAN‘S BABEL IS A LYING PRETENSION. It rests on an attempt to substitute his own foundation of society for God’s; it is

1. False safetythe high tower to keep above the flood.

2. False ambitionreaching unto heaven, making a name with bricks and mortar.

3. False unity”lest we be scattered abroad.” These are the characteristics of all Babel despotisms. Material foundations to rest upon; lying structures built upon them.

II. GOD‘S KINGDOM IS NOT REALLY HINDERED BY MAN‘S REBELLION. He suffers the Babel structure to be reared, but by his judgments scatters both the men and their projects, making the rebellious conspiracy against himself prepare the way for his ultimate universal triumph. So it has been all through the history of the world, and especially immediately before the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. The confusion of tongues was a judgment and at the same time a mercy. Those that are filled with such ambitions and build upon such foundations are not fit to dwell together in one place. It is better they should be divided. The investigations into comparative grammar and the genesis of human language point to some primitive seat of the earliest form of speech in the neighborhood indicated. It was certainly the result of the false form of society with which men began, the Nimrod empire, that they could not remain gathered in one community; and as they spread they lost their knowledge of their original language, and were confounded because they understood not one another’s speech. It is remarkable that in the beginning of the kingdom of Christ, the true city of God which shall overspread the world, the Spirit bestowed the gift of tongues, as if to signify that the Babel of man’s lying ambitions was to cease, and in the truth of the gospel men would be united as one family, “understanding one another’s speech.”R.

HOMILIES BY W. ROBERTS

Gen 11:1

Unity of language.

1. The original birthright of the human race.

2. The lost inheritance of sinful men.

3. The ultimate goal of the Christian dispensation.

4. The recovered heritage of redeemed humanity.W.

Gen 11:2

Note

1. The benefit of a wandering condition. It sometimes prevents the rise of sinful thoughts and wicked deeds. So long as the primitive nomads were travelling from station to station they did not think of either rebellion or ambition. So Israel followed God fully in the wilderness.

2. The danger of a settled state. Established in the fat plain of Shinar, they wanted a city and a tower. So Israel in Canaan waxed fat and kicked. So Moab, having been at ease from his youth, retained his scent unchanged. So comfortable surroundings often lead men from God.W.

Gen 11:3

Ancient brick makers.

I. IN SHINAR. Examples of

(1) ingenuity,

(2) earnestness,

(3) perseverance,

(4) unity in sin.

II. IN EGYPT (Exo 5:7). Illustrations of

(1) the bondage,

(2) the degradation,

(3) the misery,

(4) hopelessness, of sin.W.

Gen 11:4

The tower of Babel.

I. A MONUMENT OF MAN‘S

1. Sinful ambition.
2. Laborious ingenuity.
3. Demonstrated feebleness.
4. Stupendous folly.

II. A MEMORIAL OF GOD‘S

1. Overruling providence.
2. Resistless power.
3. Retributive justice.
4. Beneficent purpose.W.

HOMILIES BY J.F. MONTGOMERY

Gen 11:4

God’s city or man’s city.

“And they said, Go to, lot us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” In the world after the Flood we trace the, outlines of the gospel dispensation. To Noah was revealed “good will toward men; the acceptance of sacrifice; faith as the condition and channel of blessing; and work, to spread the knowledge of, and trust in his name, i.e. what he is pleased to reveal concerning himself. But “the carnal mind” was there resisting the Spirit. Noah and his seed were to replenish the earth. They were promised safety from beasts, of whom, if separated, they might be afraid (Gen 9:2; cf. Mat 10:29,Mat 10:31; Luk 10:19). Here was a trial of faith and obedience (cf. Exo 34:24). But men had not faith, would not trust, would not go forth at his word. Their calling was to seek God’s city (Heb 11:10-16), to live as citizens of it (Php 3:20). They chose a city for themselves; earthly security, comforts, luxuries. Called to glorify God’s name, their thought was to make a name for themselves. Self was the moving power. The name of God is the trust of his people (Psa 20:7; Pro 18:10); a center of unity to all his children in every place. They trusted in themselves; would be like God to themselves. The tower, the work of their own hands, was to be their center of unity; and the name of it came to be Babel, i.e. confusion (cf. Mat 15:13). Love draws mankind together. Self-seeking tends to separation. God bade them spread that they might be united in faith and in work. They chose their own way of union, and it led to dispersion with no bond of unity.

I. WE ARE CALLED TO BUILD THE CITY OF GOD (Hebrews 41:22). To prepare the way for Rev 21:3. The gifts of Christ are made effectual by the work of men. That city, built of living stones (1 Peter if. 5), cemented not with slime, but by unity of faith (Eph 4:3). And a tower, a center of unity, the “good confession” (Rom 14:11; Php 2:11). And to obtain a name, to be confessed by the Lord before the angels, to be acknowledged as his “brethren,” and stamped with the “new name.” And promise given, as if pointing to Babel: “Your labor is not in vain in the Lord.”

II. MANY HAVE NO MIND TO BUILD. They love ease and have no earnestness, triflers with time, or direct their earnestness to earthly prizesa name among men.

III. EVEN BELIEVERS ARE OFTEN THUS HINDERED. There may be spiritual selfishness along with really spiritual aims. The multitude of cares may distract the soul. Temptations may wear the garb of zeal, or of charity, or of prudence. Watch and pray. God’s faithfulness will not fail (1Co 10:13).M.

HOMILIES BY J.F. MONTGOMERY

Gen 11:5

The cities of men and the city of God

(Gen 11:5; Heb 11:16).

I. THEIR BUILDERS. Of the first, menmostly wicked men; of the second, the Architect of the universe.

II. THEIR ORIGIN. Of the first (Enoch, Gen 4:17; and Babel, Gen 11:5), hostility to God; of the second, love to man.

III. THEIR DESIGN. Of the first, to be a bond of union among sinners; of the second, to be a residence for God’s children.

IV. THEIR APPEARANCE. Of the first, that of slime, mud, bricks, or at best stones; of the second, that of gold and pearls.

V. THEIR DURATION. Of the first, it is written that with all the other works of man, they shall be burnt up; of the second that it shall be everlasting.W.

Gen 11:6

Vain imaginings

1. Commonly spring from misused blessings. A united people, with a common language, and enjoying a measure of ‘success in their buildings, the Babelites became vain in their imaginings. So do wicked men generally misinterpret the Divine beneficence and leniency which suffers them to proceed a certain length with their wickedness (cf. Rom 1:21; 2Ti 3:9). 2. Are never unobserved by him against whom they are directed (Deu 31:21; 1Ch 28:9). 3. Are doomed to certain and complete frustration (Psa 2:1; Luk 1:51; 2Co 10:5).W.

Gen 11:7

Babel and Zion.

1. Confusion, division, dispersion.

2. Gathering the dispersed, uniting the divided, restoring order to the confused.W.

6. THE GENERATIONS OF SHEM (Gen 11:10-26).

Fuente: The Complete Pulpit Commentary

Gen 11:1. The whole earth All the inhabitants of the earth, before they were divided and dispersed, spoke one common language, as descended from one common parent. The word, rendered languages sapah, signifies lip, as the margin of our Bibles has it; and the word debarim, speech, is plural, and may be rendered “the same words:” so that, probably, hereby is only expressed, that “all men used the same words pronounced in the same manner; they had the same pronunciation, and the same language.” Mr. Parkhurst observes, that as sapah signifies sense, sentiment, as well as speech and language, the meaning of this place is, “that mankind in general were unanimous in their speech and counsels, and appeared so in their sentiments and designs (probably because united under one political government); and coming to the delightful plain of Shinar, they intended all to settle there, instead of spreading themselves into the unknown countries of the earth; and to this purpose encouraged one another to build a large city, and a high tower or temple, to prevent their separation, Gen 11:4 but that God miraculously interposed, and confounded or frustrated this rebellious scheme, which was inconsistent with his will.” It clearly appears, that whatever further may be implied, the words certainly express an intercommunity of the same language, and a confusion of that common language afterwards, Gen 11:7. The reader will be pleased to remember, that when it is said in the foregoing chapter, that the earth was divided by Noah’s posterity according to their tongues or language, we remarked, at the beginning of that chapter, that the division of the earth was posterior to the event recorded here, of the confusion of languages.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

FOURTH SECTION

The Tower of Babel, the Confusion of Languages, and the Dispersion of the Nations

Gen 11:1-9

1And the whole earth was of one language [lip], and of one speech.1 2And it came to pass, as they journeyed2 from the east3, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar, and they dwelt there. 3And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly [literally, to a burning]. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar [cement]. 4And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name [a signal, sign of renown], lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. 5And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower which the children of men had builded. 6And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. 7Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language [on the very spot], that they may not understand one anothers speech. 8So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off to build the city. 9Therefore is the name of it called Babel4 [for , division of speech, confusion; other explanations: , gate of Belus, , castle of Belus], because the Lord did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the Lord scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

GENERAL PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION

1. The literature: Bibelwerk, Matthew, p. 19. The present work, p. 119, where the title of Niebuhrs work should be more correctly given: History of Assur and Babel. Berlin, 1858. Kurtz: History of the Old Testament. Haug, on the Writing and Language of the Second Kind of Cuneiform Inscriptions. Gottingen, 1855. J. Brandis, on the Historical Results from the Deciphering of the Assyrian Inscriptions. Berlin, 1856. Fabri: The Origin of Heathendom and the Problem of its Mission. Barmen, 1859. The latest: Kaulen: The Confusion of Languages at Babel. Mainz, 1861. Explorers of the ruins of Babylon, especially Rich, Ker-Porter, Layard, Rawlinson, Oppert.

2. The history of the building the tower at Babel forms the limit to the history of the primitive time. It may be regarded as the genesis of the history of the human striving after a false outward unity, of the doom of confusion that God therefore imposed upon it, of the dispersion of the nations into all the world, and of the formation of heathendom as directly connected therewith. In the proper treatment of this there comes into consideration: 1. the relation of the historical fact-consistency of the representation to its universal symbolical significance for the history of the world, and to its special symbolical significance for the kingdom of God; 2. the relation of the fact itself to the common historical knowledge, as well as to the history of the kingdom of God; 3. the relation of the confounding, therein represented, to the original unity of the human race in its language, as well as to the multiplicity that originally lay in human speech; 4. the historical and archological testimonies; 5. the reflection of the historical fact in the mythical stories.

3. Kurtz correctly maintains (History of the Old Testament, p. 95) against H. A. Hahn, that this place forms the boundary between the history of the primitive time and the history of the Old Testament. Evidently is the history of primeval religion distinguished from the general history of the Old Testament by definite monuments, namely, by the characteristic feature of the faith in promise, as presented in the genealogies, through which faith Abraham, as the type of the patriarchal religion, stands in contrast with Melchidezek, the type of the primitive religion,even as the morning twilight of the new time stands in contrast with the evening twilight of the old. And so, too, according to Galatians 3 and Romans 4, it is not Moses who is the beginning of the covenant religion, but Abraham. Moreover, in the history of the tower-building there is brought out not only the ground form for the historical configuration the world is to assume, but also the contrast between heathenism and the beginnings of the theocracy. For the sake of this contrast, according to our view, the section may still be regarded as belonging to the first period from the beginnings of the Shemitic patriarchalism; although when regarded in itself alone, and under the historical form of view of the Old Testament, it appears as an introduction to the history of Abraham.

4. The genesis of the human striving after a false outward unity, or uniformity and conformity. As in the history of Cain, the first beginnings of culture in the building of cities, in the discoveries and inventions of the means of living, of art, and of weapons of defence, were buried in their own corruption (since the germs of culture, however lawful in themselves, are overwhelmed in their ungodly worthlessness), and as in the history of Nimrod the post-diluvian beginnings of civilization, and of outward political institutions, were darkened by the indications of despotic violence, so also, in the history of the tower-building, must we distinguish the natural striving of the human race after an essential unity, from their aberration in a bold and violent effort to obtain an outward consistency, an outward uniformity (or conformity rather) to be established at the cost of the inward unity. Delitzsch says correctly (p. 310): the unity which had hitherto bound together the human family was the community of one God, and of one divine worship. This unity did not satisfy them; inwardly they had already lost it; and therefore it was that they strove for another. There is, therefore, an ungodly unity, which they sought to reach through such self-invented, sensual, outward means, whilst the very thing they feared they predicted as their punishment. In its essence, therefore, it was a Titanic heaven-defying undertaking.5 The inward unity of faith ought to have been the centre of gravity, the rule and the measure of their outward unity. The historical form of their true unity was the religion of Shem; its concrete middle point was Shem himself. It sounds, therefore, like a derisive allusion to the despised blessing of Shem, when they say: Go to, let us build a tower for us, and make unto ourselves a name (a Shem). When, therefore, the tower-building, the false outward idea of unity is frustrated, then it is that Abraham must appear upon the stage as the effective middle point of humanity, and the preparer of the way for the unity that was to come. Abraham forms the theocratic contrast to the heathen tower-building. Since that time, however, the striving of human nature has ever taken the other direction, namely, to establish by force the outward unity of humanity at the expense of the inward, and in contradiction to it; this has appeared as well in the history of the world monarchies as in that of the hierarchies. The history of Babel had its presignal in the city of Cain, its symbol in the building of the tower, its beginning in the Babylonian world-monarchy; but its end, according to Rev 16:17, falls in the last time. The contrast to this history of an outward force-unity is formed by Shem, Abraham, Zion, Christ, the Church of believers, the bride of Christ, according to Rev 21:2; Rev 21:9.

5. The genesis of the confounding to which it was doomed by God. The germinal multiplicity, as contained in the unity of the human race, is to be regarded as the natural basis of the event. We cannot, as has been attempted by Origen and others, derive an organic division of the nations in their manifold contrasts (and just as little the varied multiplicity of life in the world) from the fall merely, or from human corruption. To this effect it is well observed by Delitzsch, that even without that divine and miraculous interposition, the one original language, by virtue of the abundance of gifts and powers that belong to humanity, would have run through an advancing process of enrichment, spiritualization, and diversity. This germinal multiplicity forms, therefore, the other side, or the higher, spiritual side, in the confusion of languages; but this, too, we must distinguish in its genesis and in its world-historical consequences. Since the Babylonian tower-building denotes the genesis of the national separations as the genesis of heathendom (but not the monstrous development of heathendom which goes on through the ages), so, in like manner, does it denote the genesis of the speech-confounding, but not its great development in the course of time. This genesis, however, is to be considered in reference to the following points: 1. With the violent striving after an outward unity there is connected the crushing of the diversity. 2. This violent suppression calls out, by way of reaction, the effort and intensity of the diversifying tendency, or the conflict of spirits. 3. With this conflict of spirits there develops itself, also, the contrast of varying views and modes of expression. 4. The disordered and broken unity becomes dissolved into partial unities, which form themselves around the middle points of tribal affinity, and so form their watchwords. Thus far goes on the process of dissolution, in the sin and guilt of the strife after an outward unity. But here comes in the divine judgment in its miraculous imposition: the spirits, the modes of conception, the modes of expression, the tongues themselves, are all so confounded, that there becomes a perfect breach of unity, and more than this, a hostile springing apart of unfettered elements that had been bound up in a forced unity. So did the divine doom establish a genesis in the confusion of languagesa genesis which afterwards, in the course of time, came to its full development.

6. The genesis of the dispersion of the peoples in all the world, and of the formation of heathendom that from thence began. In opposition to the centripetal force of humanity, impaired by its own supertension and the outward alienating tendency, comes now the reaction of the morbid centrifugal power set free by the sentence of God. So commence the national emigrations of antiquity, setting away from the centre of community, forming in this a contrast to the migrations of the Christian time, which maintain their connection with the centre of humanity, the host of the Christian church. In greater and smaller waves of migration do the nations scatter abroad, and grow widely diverse in their separate lands, and in the midst of the views which they awaken; and this to such a degree that everywhere they lose themselves in a peculiarly paganistic autochthonic consciousness, or, as it may be generally styled, a servile life of nature. The line of Shem is least affected by the drawing of this centrifugal power. It extends itself slowly from Babylon, in a small degree to the east, and in great part to the southwest. The main stream of the Hamites takes a southwestern direction towards Canaan and Africa; another stream appears to have turned itself eastwardly over Persia and towards India. The great stream of the Japhethites goes first northward, in order to divide itself into a western and an eastern current; a part, however, in all probability, taking a still more northern direction, until, through upper Asia, it reaches the New World. The most evident division of the Shemites is into three parts, which still reflect themselves in the three main Shemitic languages. The fundamental separation has gone on into wider separations; for example, into the division of the Indian and the Persian Arians. These divisions are, again, in a great degree, effaced by combinations which proceeded from the contrast between earlier and later migrations in the same direction. So, for example, in eastern Asia, the Japhethites appear to have supervened upon the Hamites, in Asia Minor and Persia upon the Shemites; and so, in many ways, have the earlier Japhethite features been overlaid and set aside by the later. In Canaan, on the other hand, the Hamites appear to have supervened upon the original Shemitic inhabitants; and then, again, at a later date, the Israelites supervened upon the Hamitic Canaanites.

The most direct consequence of this dispersion of the nations was the formation of races, in which different factors coperated: 1. The family type; 2. the spiritual direction; 3. the climate in its strong effect upon the physical ground-forms which were yet in their state of childlike flexibility. A further consequence was the formation of ethnographical contrasts in civilization. In reference to this there must be distinguished:
1) The contrast between the savage nations who had become utterly unhistorical, or perfectly separated from the central humanity, and the historical nations.
2) The contrast of barbarian nations who for a long time preserved a state of negative indifference as compared with the nations that were within the community of culture.
3) The contrast presented by the nations and tribes of isolated culture, as compared with the centralized culture, or that of the world monarchies as it appeared in its latest form, the Grco-Roman-humanitarian sphere of culture.
4) The contrast presented by the nations of this centralized culture, or as it finally appeared in the Grco-Roman-humanitarian culture, as compared with the central theocratic people of cultus or religion.

The last contrasts reveal, as the second consequence, a double counterworking against the paganistic isolization; the first is a tendency to the outer unity (world-monarchy), the other a tendency to the inner unity (theocracy). A third consequence was the war between them.
7. The relation of the historical fact-consistency of the Biblical representation to its symbolical significance for the universal history of the world. It is difficult to determine the chronological order of the tower-building in the Biblical history; it is still more difficult to fix its place in the universal secular history. It is, however, more easy to do this when we assume that the history of the tower-building was that of a gradually elapsing event, which is here all comprehended in its germinal transition-point (as the commencing turning-point), conformably to the representation of the religious historico-symbolical historiography. Following the indications of the Bible itself, we must distinguish two periods: first, the founding of Babel, in consequence of an ungodly centralization fancy of the first human race, and the catastrophe of the commencing dissolution that thereby came in; secondly, the despotic founding of the kingdom of Babel by Nimrod, as connected with it. Add to this a third, which is in like manner attested by the Bible, namely, the further development of Babel as it continued on in spite of the dispersion, and to whose greatness the stories of Ninus and Semiramis, as well as the world-historical ruins of Babylon bear testimony. It is in perfect accordance with the theocratic historiography, that events which occupy periods are comprehended in the germinal points of their peculiar epochs. As this is the case with the tower-building, so does it also hold true of the confusion of languages, and the dispersion of the nations. In regard now to this germinal point especially, it has been wrongly placed in the days of Peleg, in supposed accordance with what was said, Gen 10:25, concerning the meaning of the name Peleg. Keil computes that Peleg was born one hundred years after the flood, and draws from thence the wider conclusion, that in the course of one hundred and fifty to one hundred and eighty years, and in the rapid succession of births, the descendants of the three sons of Noah, who were already married and a hundred years old at the time of the flood, must have already so greatly multiplied as to render credible their proceeding to build such a tower (p. 120). In respect to the third designated period of the tower-building, Delitzsch thus remarks in relation to the Biblical interpretation of the name Babel (for Balbel, a pilpel form in which the first Lamed has fallen out): The name Babel denotes the world city where men became dispersed into nations, as the name Jerusalem denotes the city of God, where they are again brought together as one family. As the name Jerusalem obtains this sense in the light of prophecy, so is the name given to Babel, no matter whether with or without the design of the first namer, a significant hiero-glyph of that judgment of God which was interwoven in the very origin of this world-city, and of that tendency to an ungodly unity which it has ever manifested. That the name, in the sense of the world-city itself, may denote something else, is not opposed to this. The Etymologicum Magnum derives it , and so, according to Masudi, do the learned Persians and Nabatans. It has, accordingly, been explained as the gate or the house, or, according to Knobel, the castle of Belus ( equal to or , or for ). Schellings remark that bab in the sense of gate is peculiar to the Arabian dialect, is without ground; it is just as much Aramaic as Arabic. The verb , intrare, like ascendere, is a very old derivative from , inire. But Rawlinson and Oppert have shown, on the authority of the inscriptions, that the name of the god is not , but (the Babylonian Phnician Kronos), and , therefore, denotes the gate of El. If the development of heathenism, in a religious sense, and, therefore, the development of idolatry, is regarded as a gradual process, the heathenish tendency at the time of Nimrod could not have been far advanced. Its more distant beginning is probably to be placed in the very time of the catastrophe; for the confusion of fundamental religious views may, in general, furnish of itself an essential factor in the confusion of languages.

On the situation of the land of Shinar and Babylon this side of the Euphrates, compare the Manuals for the old geography by Forbiger and others. Concerning the ruins of the old Babel, and Babel itself, compare Winers Real Lexicon, the Dictionary for Christian People, and Herzogs Real Encyclopedia, under the article Babel. In like manner Delitzsch, p. 212; Knobel, p. 127, and the catalogue of literature there given.

8. The special symbolic significance of Babel for the kingdom of God. Here there are to be distinguished the following stages: 1. The significance of the tower-building; 2. the Babel of Nimrod, or the despotic form of empire, and its tendency to conquest; 3. the significance of the world-monarchy of Nebuchadnezzar; 4. the Old Testament symbolic interpretation of Babel (Psalms 137; Isaiah 14; Jeremiah 50; Dan 2:37; Dan 7:4; Habakuk); 5. The New-Testament apocalyptic Babylon (Revelation 14, 16, 17). Throughout Holy Scripture, Babel forms a world-historical antithesis to Zion.

9. The relation of the confounding, as presented, to the original unity of the human race, as also to the original multiplicity as lying at the foundation of human speech. The two poles by which the catastrophe of the speech-confounding are limited, are the following: In the first place, even after the confusion of languages, there exists a fundamental unity; there is the logical unity of the ground-forms of language (verb, substantive, etc.), the rhetorical unity of figurative modes of expression, the lexical unity of kindred fundamental sounds, the grammatical unity of kindred linguistic families, such as the Shemitic, the Indo-Germanic, and the historical unity in the blending of different idioms; as, for example, in the , or common dialect, there are blended the most diverse dialects of the Greek; so in the New-Testament Greek, to a certain extent, the Hebrew and old Greek; in the Roman languages, Latin, German, and Celtic dialects; so, also, in the English; in the Lutheran High German, too, there are different dialects of Germany. Science takes for its reconciling medium an ideal unity from the beginning of the separations; faith supposes a real unity, and so, finally, Christendom and the Bible. In the second place, however, it must be acknowledged that in the original manifoldness of human power and views there was already indicated a manifoldness of different modes of expression. Indeed, says Delitzsch, even if this wonderful divine interposition had not taken place, the one primitive speech would not have remained in stagnant immobility. By reason of the richness of the gifts that are stored in humanity, it would have run through a process of progressive self-enrichment, spiritualization, development, and manifold diversity; but now, when the linguistic unity of humanity was lost, together with its unity in God, and with it, also, the unity of an all-defining consciousness, there came, in the place of this multiplicity in unity, a breaking up, a cleaving asunder, where all connection seems lost, but which, nevertheless, through a thousand indices, points back to the fact of an original oneness. For, as Schelling says, confusion of language only originates wherever discordant elements which cannot attain to unity can just as little come from one another. In every developing speech the original unity works on, even as the affinity partially shows; a taking away of all unity would be the taking away of language itself; and, thereby, of everything human,a limit to which, according to Schellings judgment, the South American Indians are approaching, as tribes that can never become nations, and which are yet a living witness of a complete and inevitable disorganization (Delitzsch, p. 114, 115). In accordance with the religious character of Holy Scripture, we must, before all things, regard the confusion of languages as a confusion of the religious understanding. Languages expressive mainly of the subjective, languages of the objective, those of an ingenuous directness, and those of acute or ingenious accommodation, must very soon present great contrasts.

In regard to the original language, which preceded the confusion, and formed its ground, the learned men of the Jewish Synagogue, and after them, the church fathers, as well as many orthodox theologians (among the modems with some limitation, Pareau, Havernik, Von Gerlach, Baumgarten), have expressed the opinion that the Hebrew was the language of the primitive time and of Paradise, and that it was propagated after the flood by the race of Eber. On the contrary, however, it is observed that Abraham himself did not originally speak Hebrew, but Aramaic.6 On this account, says Delitzsch, we must regard as better grounded the position of the Syriac, Aramaic, and Persian writers, that the Syriac, or the Nabatan, was the primitive speech, and that in the confusion of tongues it was still retained as the language of Babylon. But, moreover, the Shemitic in its general acceptation, he continues, cannot lay claim to that perfection which must have belonged to the primitive speech. We find nothing to urge against the supposition that the original language, as such, may have become lost in those that are historically known (Delitzsch, p. 316; Keil, p. 119). Nevertheless, we do not believe that this supposition receives any strength from what is a mere prejudice, namely, that in respect to its structure the paradise language must have been a very perfect one. The speech of holy innocence has no need to prove its claims through forms developed with great exactness. As the Shemitic verbal forms lie in the middle between the monosyllabic character of the Chinese and the polysyllabic character of the Indo-Germanic; as they carry with themselves, also, in a high degree, that impression of immediateness, of the onomatopic, of the sensible presentation of the spiritual, of the spiritualizing of the sensible, so, without doubt, do they lie specially near to the ground-form of different national tongues. In respect to the relation of the different languages, there may be compared the following writings as specially belonging to the subject, namely: Delitzsch: Jeschurun; Frst: Concordance; Treatises of Kunic, Ernest Renan; see Delitzsch, p. 632. Besides these, Kaulen, p. 70 (The Hebrew in its peculiar character stands nearest to the conception of the primitive speech).

Zahn, in his treatise (The Kingdom of God, p. 90), presents a clear idea of the similarity of different languages. The great Language Atlas of Balbi is designed on the most carefully considered principles (Paris, 1826). After a keenly investigated division of language and dialect, he designates eight hundred and sixty languages as spoken on the earth, namely, fifty-three in Europe, one hundred and fifty-three in Asia, one hundred and fifteen in Africa, four hundred and twenty-two in America, one hundred and seventeen in the fifth portion of the world; and yet at this day must the whole sum be taken at a greater number, especially in consequence of researches in Africa. Kaulen. Linguistic investigations that belong here are connected with the names of Herder, Adelung, Vater, Klaproth, Balbi, Remsat, W. Von Humboldt, Schleicher, Heyse, Bopp, Steinthall, Pott, Schott, Ewald, Frst, Bunsen, Max Mller, Jones, Oppert, Haug, and others. In favor of the original unity of languages, as against Pott and others who call it in question, see Kaulen, p. 26; Treatises on the Origin of Languages, by the same author, p. 106.

10. The historical and archological testimonies for the fact of the confusion of languages. Bunsen: Comparative Philology would have been compelled to set forth as a postulate the supposition of some such division of languages in Asia, especially on the ground of the relation of the Egyptian language to the Shemitic, even if the Bible had not assured us of the truth of this great historical event. It is truly wonderful, it is matter of astonishment, [it is more than a mere astounding fact,] that something so purely historical [and yet divinely fixed], something so conformable to reason, [and yet not to be conceived of as a mere natural development], is here related to us out of the oldest primeval period, and which now, for the first time, through the new science of philology, has become capable of being historically and philosophically explained. Between this history and the previous chapter must lie the primitive history of the eastern Asiatics, namely, the time of the formation of the Chinese language, that primitive speech that has no formative words, that is, no inflecting forms. The Chinese can hardly take rank as a radical language, but only as a very ancient and strikingly one-sided ramification. To the linguistic testimonies there may be added the fact that Babylon became the oldest world-monarchy; there is also its very ancient fame, and the fact that the influence which went out from Babylon has in the most varied forms pervaded the whole history of the world, to say nothing of its giant ruins and the desolation which has so long rested as a judgment upon them.

11. The mirroring of the confusion of languages as found in the mythical stories. See Delitzsch, p. 313; Lcken, p. 278; Eusebius, Prparatio, ix. 14. Abydenus: Some say that the men who first came forth from the earth, being confident in their greatness and strength, and despising the gods in their fancied, estimation of their own powers, undertook to build a high tower in the place where Babylon now is. They would already have made a near approach to the Heavens, had not the winds come to the help of the gods and overturned their tower. Its ruins have received the name of Babylon. Men had hitherto spoken but one language, but now, in the purpose of the gods, their speech became diverse; to this belongs the war that broke out between Kronos and Titan.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

1. Gen 11:1-2. The settling in the land of Shinar.The whole earth, that is, the whole human race.One language and one speech (Lange more literally, one lip and one kind of words). The form and the material of language were the same for all.From the East (Lange renders, towards the East. Our margin, Eastward).From the land of Ararat, southeast ( as one word: the land of, or from the East).A plane.For them, as they came from the highlands, the plane was the low country, a valley plane ().Shinar, the same as Babylonia, though extending farther northward.And they dwelt there.The preference for the hill country does not appear to have belonged to the young humanity. Under the most obvious points of view, convenience, fertility, and easier capability of cultivation, seem to have given to these children of nature a preference for the plain. Even at this day do the uncultivated inhabitants of the hills sometimes manifest the same choice. In this respect Babylon had for them the charm of extraordinary fruitfulness. Zahn (Kingdom of God, p. 86) gives extracts from Hippocrates and Herodotus in proof of the singular productiveness of this land of the palm, where the grain yields from two hundred to three hundred fold. Thence came luxury, which was followed by the cultivation of the paradisaical gardens (Gardens of Semiramis) and a life of sensuality, together with a sensual religious worship.

2. Gen 11:3-4. The building of the tower.They said one to another, Go to.Expressive of an animated, decided undertaking.Let us make brick.The plain was deficient in stones, whereas, on the contrary, it abounded in a clayey soil which would serve for making bricks, and asphaltum, which was good for mortar. They burnt them to stone instead of merely hardening them in the sun, which otherwise was the more obvious practice.And they said (again) Go to.Their success in preparing bricks for their dwellings encouraged them to go farther. They resolved upon the building of a city, and a tower whose top may reach, etc. At the ground of this there evidently lies the impression of immensity as derived from the Babylonian plane, which actually, in its great extent, as some travellers have described it, gives the conception of the sublime. The visible middle point of the same must have been the tower, standing up as a sign of unity for the whole human race. According to the representation, therefore, the words, even to the heaven, would mean that the heaven was regarded as something that could be reached; although at a later period such language occurs in a hyperbolical sense.And let us make us a name.The expression denotes the appointing or establishing for ones self a signal of renown (Isa 63:12; Isa 63:14; Jer 32:20). The sign of security shall be for them, at the same time, a sign of their fame, and thus, doubtless, would they give themselves a name as a people.Lest we be scattered abroad.Not only as a visible signal, but by the glory of its fame shall the tower hold them together. This is the expression of the political and popular feeling of antiquity; in the pride of the national spirit the individual is lost with his strength and his conscience. Such is the characteristic feature of Babel everywhere, whether upon the Euphrates, the Tiber, or the Seine. The individual with his convictions, his freedom, his personality, must be wholly sacrificed to the name of uniformity, whether it be worldly or ecclesiastical. What is said here relates not merely to an ungodly, arbitrary, ambitious, individually titanic undertaking, but to the first introduction of that atheistical and antichristian principle which would not merely promote the prosperity and authority of the whole in connection with the well-being and the freedom of the individual person, but also make the individual an involuntary sacrifice to a unity, which becomes, in that way, a false unity, as well as a false idol placed on the throne of the living God,and this whether it be called Babel, Rome, the Church, or la grande nation. Gethe:

Be it truth, or be it fable,
That in thousand books is shown,
All is but a tower of Babel,
Unless love shall make them one.
Or we may adopt as a various reading,
When love of glory makes them one.
The question here relates to the destruction, in their very principles, of the Shemitic call to religion, and the Japhethic tendency to civilization, by a Hamitic confounding of religion and culture, to the obstruction of the true progress of the world and of the state, by resolving the constitution of human history into an immovable Hamitic naturalism. According to Knobel, the whole significance of the fact becomes resolved into one view. This view (he says) the author imputes to them after the event, since Babylon, that most splendid city, as the Greeks regarded it (Herod. i. 178), did, indeed, redound to the fame of its builders, but, at the same time, would thereby furnish a proof of their impious pride. And yet, even in Knobel, the world-historical substratum in the representation very clearly appears, when he says, that according to Berosus and Eupolemus, there were stories among the Chaldans that those who were saved in the flood, when they came to Babylonia, again restored the place, and especially built there a high tower. For that purpose there met together in Babylonia diverse masses of people, etc. He proceeds to say, moreover, that Babylon in later times became the central point of the nations, that it was, besides, a very ancient city, that two thousand years before Semiramis it was built for the son of Belus, and that, by reason of its huge magnitude, its temple of Belus, its high tower, and its dissolute morals giving it the appearance of the very home of sin (Curtius, v. 1, 36), as well as on account of its name, it had a peculiar fitness for the Scriptural authors narration. The symbolical significance, however, of the appearance of Babylon, as matter of fact, is, in this way, wholly effaced.

3. Gen 11:5-8. The intervention of Jehovah, his counsel and his act. Without the thought of any Jehovistic document, it would be readily conceived that the frustration of such an undertaking must proceed from God as Jehovah, the founder and protector of the divine kingdom. The coming down7 of Jehovah forms a grand contrast to the rebellious uprising of the Babylonians with their tower. The higher they build, so much deeper, to speak anthropopathically, must he descend that he may rightly look into the matter. Moreover, the expression go to, as used by God, forms an ironical contrast to the two-fold go to (, come on, give way now), as used by the Babylonians. The one nullifies the other and turns it against them.This they begin to do, and now nothing will be restrained from them.This reminds us of the declaration: Adam is become like one of us. Under the form of apprehension there lies an ironical expression of the conscious certainty of the divine rule.And the Lord came down.Delitzsch here again reminds us that (according to Hoffman) Jehovah, after the judgment of the flood, had transferred his throne to the heaven. Keil, however, correctly finds, at least in this place, only the anthropopathic expression of the divine interposition.Behold, the people is one., connection, community. The people, as a community, physically self-unfolding, is called (from , probably in the sense of mound-like, extending, swelling8); the people, as an ethical community, a State, as constituted by an idea, is called , from (to bind together, to associate).They begin to do.An indication of the future Babel in the worlds history:And now nothing will be restrained from them.In truth, if God interpose not, the prospect is opened, that the pride and confidence of men will advance with extreme rapidity towards the destruction of freedom, of the personal life, of the divine seed and kingdom.Let us go down and there confound their language.Upon the descent of Jehovah in his beholding, there follows his descent in his counsel.Let us.And here, again, according to Delitzsch, does Jehovah include with himself his angels, the executors of his penal justice. Here, as elsewhere, an inappropriate idea.Let us confound.Knobel would understand by to separate, and accordingly translates Babel as meaning separation. But thereby is the conception of the act carried into the unmeaning. What is said does not refer properly to a separation merely of human speech. The manner in which it is confounded is not described. According to Koppen, the miracle must have consisted wholly in an inward process, that is, a taking away of the old associations of ideas connected with words, and an immediate implanting of new and diverse modes of expression.9 According to Lilienthal, Hoffman (A. Feldhoff and others) it must have been wholly an outward process, a confusion of the lips, of pronunciation, of dialects; whilst Scaliger holds that differing meanings were connected with like words or sounds. The historical symbolical expression, however, may mean, perhaps, that the process of inward alienation and variation, the ground of which lay in the manifoldness of dispositions, and the reciprocity of spiritual tendencies, became fixed in diverse forms of speech and modes of expression, by reason of a sudden catastrophe brought upon them by God. The heathenish Babylonian tendency reflects itself still in the enigmatical, capriciously varying dialects of the same people, which is sometimes to be remarked in different quarters of the same city, or in the different peasantry of the same community, but which must have especially had place in the earlier times, when isolization became predominant. The first germ of the speech confounding must, accordingly, have shown itself as a diseased action which the fall introduced into the original innate germ of speech development. For a long time it remained naturally latent in the family of Noah, but manifested its full power in the time of the tower-building; and then the effect of that epoch prolongs itself through the whole history of the world. In like manner, however, was there a counter influence, too, from the days of Abraham onward. According to Kaulen (p. 220), the miracle consists in this, that at that time, and in that region, there was introduced a linguistic change which, although it would have naturally come in in the course of things, would nevertheless have required for its full development other conditions of space and time than those presented. If there is meant by this only a wonderful acceleration of a natural development, the view does not satisfy. Rightly says Fabri (p. 31): A confounding of languages presupposes a confusion of the consciousness, a separation of the original speech into many, a disorder and a breach in the original common consciousness in respect to God and the world.The history of the tower-building is the history of the origin of heathenism.So the Lord scattered them abroad.Out of their purpose comes its direct opposite.And they left off to build.That is, as a community of the human race with that distinct tendency. The idea, however, is not excluded, that the Babylonians who remained behind kept on building Babel. The success of the enterprise was frustrated, but not analogous and limited undertakings of the same tendency; it appears, for example, in the great world monarchies. This first disappointment, however, was a type of all others, as they successively become apparent in the catastrophes of these world monarchies, and the last fulfilling will be found in the fall of Babylon, as mentioned in the Apocalypse. That the structure itself was laid in ruins by an exercise of divine power which afterwards took place, is told us, indeed, by the sibyl, but not by the Scripture. Delitzsch.

4. Wherefore is the name of it called Babel.In deriving the name from bab, gate, gate of Bel, or El, the authority of the religious interpretation is not excluded, as Keil supposes in his second note, p. 119. Only we must distinguish between the frustration of the tower-building and the destruction of the later Babel that was still built on, and which, probably, for the first after the dispersion of the nations, came to be the seat of a heathenish worship. Concerning the significance and the building material of Babylon, the classical writers agree with the Old Testament,for example: Herod. i. Gen 178; Strabo, 16; Diodorus, ii. 7; Arrian, Alex. vii. 17; Curt. Alex. 5, 1, 25; Eustath. ad Dyonys. Perieg. 1005. According to them the huge walls of Babylon were made of burnt brick, as were also the magnificent structure of the temple of Belus, and the hanging gardens. According to one, the circumference of the city amounted to 480 stadia, or 60,000 paces; according to others, 385 or 360 stadia (furlongs), making, therefore, a journey of from 18 to 24 hours. The building of most importance was the quadrangular temple of Belus, each side of which was two furlongs in length; out of this there arose, by eight terraces, a strong, massive tower, which, according to Herodotus, was one furlong in length and breadth, and, according to Strabo, one stadium (that is 600 feet) high. The accounts of modern travellers amount to a confirmation of the ancient statements. The remains of the temple of Belus that was overthrown by Xerxes, and now called Birs Nimrod, form a huge mound of ruins, consisting of burnt and unburnt bricks, cemented partly with lime and partly with bitumen. The whole plain of Babylon is covered with mounds of rubbish from the same materials (see Ker-Porter: Travels, vol. ii. p. 301; Buckingham: Travels in Mesopotamia, p. 472; Layard: Nineveh and Babylon, p. 374; and Ritters Geography, xi. p. 876). The ancients, for the most part, ascribe the building of Babylon to Semiramis, but this can only be true of its extension and fortification. According to the ancient inscriptions, the city was older than this (Knobel on the Genealogical Table, p. 346), and, according to Gen 10:10, it must have been already in existence at the time of Nimrod. Knobel. In respect to the city, see also HerzogsReal-Encyclopdie, article Babel. On the ruins of Babylon, see Delitzsch, p. 312, with reference to the account of the traveller, James Rich. The Arabians regard the ruins of Birs Nimrod as the Babylonian tower that was destroyed by fire from heaven. Delitzsch, who at first regarded Birs Nimrod as the temple of Belus (as Rawlinson, too, supposes), remarks now, on the contrary, that the temple of Belus stood in the middle of the city, but that Birs Nimrod was situated in the suburb Borsippa, two miles south. But now, according to Opperts supposition, Borsippa means tower of languages, and, therefore, the opinion has much in its favor that the Birs Nimrod had been already in the very ancient time, the observatory of the Chaldan astrologers, with which the tower of the speech-confounding stands in historical connection. It seems difficult to suppose that the tower, which was to denote the centre of the earth, should be placed at a miles distance outside of the city which was distinctly regarded as the capital of the earth. Moreover, this tower might, at a later day, have become the tower of Belus. Bunsen, nevertheless, decides for Birs Nimrod (with reference to Rawlinson), and the name supports the conclusion that the tradition speaks for this place. Of special importance, besides, is the inscription of Borsippa, as given by Oppert, which introduces Nebuchadnezzar as speaking, and according to which the first building of Birs Nimrod is carried back, in its antiquity, 42 generations. See Fabri, p. 49.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. See the preliminary discussion. Analogous to this gigantic undertaking of the young humanity are the later monumental buildings of the Egyptians, of the Indians, of Greece, and of other lands. Like the mythological systems of the civilized nations of antiquity, they present an historical contradiction of a favorite modern view, according to which the whole human race had only gradually worked itself out of an animal or beastly state.
2. The character and the teleology of heathenism. The essence of heathenism is strikingly characterized in our narration as a diseased oscillation between the attraction of humanity to unity, on the one hand, and to multiplicity and unrestrained dismemberment on the other. From the Babylonish striving after an outward unity proceeds the first dispersion of the nations. This afterwards takes the form of a dismemberment of the same in a peculiar sense; it becomes, in other words, a heathenish, national, or local consciousness, an idolatrous, antochthonic consciousness, growing wild with the notions of a national earth and a national heavens, whilst, in its utter disorder, it sinks down to the mere prejudice which regards every stranger as an enemy (hostis), and proceeds, at last, to that absolute exclusiveness which causes the inhabitant of the island to put to death any one from abroad, and the Bushman to threaten every new comer with his poisoned arrows. In the same manner, from a religious striving after a pantheistic world-view, there originates the first declining of the spirit into polytheism. And then, too, the different world-monarchies furnish a proof that the diseased centripetal drawing in the world ever works in interchange with that centrifugal tendency. Upon the downfall of any such world-monarchy, there follows again, in various ways, a dissolution and a dispersion of elements. Even in the history of the Church do we find a shadowy outline of the same process; and yet it is just the task and the daily work of the essential Church to mediate more and more the true development and appearance, both of unity and variety, among the nations; though in truth it does this through the light and law of the Gospel as it goes out from the spiritual Zion, or that true kingdom of God which has its organization in the Church. The true reciprocity between unity and division constitutes the life of humanity. The false, feverish, exaggerated reciprocity, which tends to the overstraining, and, at the same time, the division and dissolution of both these influences, is its disease and its death. The striving of the world-monarchies breaks down against the power of the national individualities. Again, the national isolations are interrupted and broken up by the world-monarchies. But dispersion has the special effect to distribute the evil, to dismember, to send one people as a judgment upon another, until there is awakened in all a feeling of the need of deliverance and unity. Here belong the ethnographic and the mythologic systems. In respect to the first, compare Langes Miscellaneous Writings, i. p. 74. On the last, see Langes treatise entitled, Die Gesetzlich-Catholische Kirche als Sinnbild.

3. As the myth of the Titans reflects itself in the creative periods, so does it also in the Babylonish tower-building.
4. Fabri, p. Genesis 44 : In a manner more or less distinctly marked, since the time of Babel, has every nation, and every group of nations, had spread over it its peculiar veil (Isa 25:7) which has impregnated and penetrated the whole national consciousness. Even in the present age of the world does this remain, not yet broken through, morally and spiritually, by whole nations, but only by individuals out of every nation, who in Christ have attained to the participation of a new and divine birth,these, however, being the very core and heart of such nations, and forming with one another a people in a people. For in Christ alone does man awake to a universal theanthropic consciousness. [True indeed, but Christ, according to Matthew 13, works after the manner of leaven; and in fact, as a principle of new life for the whole humanity (Rom 5:12), and the veils of the nations are gradually lifted up before they are wholly removed or torn away. It is not the individuals and the nations that form the contrast in the present course of the world, but the grain (the elect) and the chaff in the nations,in other words, the contrast between the believing and the unbelievingbetween people and people.]

5. The ironical element in the rule of the divine righteousness (see Gen 3:22) appears again in the history of the tower-building, after its grandest display in the primitive time. It is just from the false striving after the idol of an outward national unity, that God suffers to go forth the dispersing of the nations. Without doubt, too, is there an ironical force in the words: and now nothing will be restrained from them (Gen 11:7).

6. In this demonical effort of the Babylonians to build a tower that should reach to heaven, there still remains an element of good. By means of it, in later times, they appeared as the oldest explorers of the stars, who discovered the zodiac and many other astronomical phenomena,as astronomers, in fact, with their searching gaze raised to heaven, although their science was covered under an astrological veil. The unfinished tower was transformed into an observatory; and how vast the benefit that from thence has come to man!
7. The heathenish yet Titanic energy of the Babylonian spirit proves itself in the fact, that whilst in the one direction their worship went to the extreme of offering human sacrifices, it became, on the other, a service of revolting licentiousness.
8. Let us build us a tower and make us a name. The antithetic relation which this watchword of theirs bore to Shem (the name), and the destination that God had given to him that he should be the potential central point of humanity, may also be indicated by the name Nimrod (, come on, now let us rebel). And so, according to the view of Roos, may the race of Ham have become engaged with special zeal in this tower-building, for the very purpose of weakening the prophecy. But, then, that would lead to the conclusion of a variance with the Shemites, and an overpowering of them, whereas our history represents it as a universal understanding. Moreover, in Gen 10:10, Nimrod appears, not as the builder of Babel, but as the founder of the kingdom of that name; whereas Genesis 11 relates to the building of the city itself. We must, therefore, suppose that in the understanding mentioned, Genesis 11, the Shemites were either infatuated, or that they were silenced. The text, however, supposes an understanding of the races. We may, perhaps, assume that, in the designation of the tower, Shems priority was symbolically indicated, and that on this account his race would be satisfied. There would result, then, a distinct consequence. Upon this free federal cooperation of the patriarchal races, there followed the despotic exaltation of Nimrod, which contributed, moreover, to hasten the Babylonic dissolution. We make more difficult the view we take of the transaction when we measure the greatness of the tower before the dispersion by the later magnitude of the tower of Belus, or of the Bris Nimrod. Mesopotamia, says Bunsen, is covered from north to south with ruins and localities with which the name of Nimrod is everywhere connected; as in Babylonia so also in Nineveh, lying farther of and eastward from upper Mesopotamia; even the country of the Riphan mountains, at the source of the Tigris, and so the part of Armenia which lies north from Nineveh, and west of the lake Van, has its Mount Nimrod.

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The tower of Babel in its historical and figurative significance: a gigantic undertaking, an apparent success, a frustrated purpose, an eternal sign of warning. 2. The repeating of the same history in the political and ecclesiastical spheres.The spiritual history of Babylon to its latest fulfilling according to the Apocalypse. The confusion of languages at Babel, and the scene of the Pentecost at Jerusalem.Babel and Zion.Babel, confusion; Jerusalem, peace. Christianity, Gods descent to earth, to unite again the discordant languages. Christianity, in what way it makes the languages one: 1. In that from all spirits it makes one spirit of life; 2. from all peoples one people; 3. from all witnessings, one confession of faith, one doxology, one salutation of love.

Starke: Supposition, that first after the flood men drew from Armenia towards Persia, then eastward towards Babylon. Hedinger: Pride aims ever at the highest. Avarice and ambition have no bounds (Jer 23:23; Luk 1:51).

Lisco: The design of the tower-building is threefold: 1. To gratify the passion for glory which would make itself a name; 2. defiance of God, reaching even to the heaven, his seat of habitation; 3. that the tower might be a point of union and of rendezvous for the whole human race. Selfishness ever separates; so was it here; love and humility alone constitute the true and enduring bond; but this is found only in the kingdom of God, never in the kingdom of the world. As here, so evermore, is Babel the name of pride, of show, of vain glory, of national subjugation, of fraud and tyranny upon the earth. As in this place, so is it always the emblem of insolence towards God, of soaring to heaven, of making its throne among the stars, and, at the same time, of confusion, of desolation, of Gods derisive irony in view of the giant projects of men (comp. Isaiah 14; Revelation 18).Gerlach: There are now formed the sharply separated families of the nations, each confined to itself alone, and standing to others in an essentially hostile relation; each must now use and develop its own peculiar power. The whole heathen world knows no more any unity of the human race, until finally, through the Gospel, men again recognize the fact that they are all of one blood, that they have all one great common want, and have for their father one God,until, in short, the languages which the pride of Babel separated become again united in the love and humility of Zion.

Calwer Handbuch: It is worthy of remark that the modern researches into language have recognized the original affinity of most known languages to one common original speech. The sundering and parting of the nations is Gods own work. As labor was the penalty for the sin of paradise, so is separation the punishment for this sin of pride. In both cases, however, was the punishment at the same time a blessing.

Schrder: It is the spirit of Nimrod that inflates humanity in the plane of Babylon. The tower, as historical fact, is to form the apotheosis of humanity.

Luther: They have no concern that Gods name be hallowed, but all their care and planning turns to this, that their own name may become great and celebrated on the earth. This city and tower of men is fundamentally nothing else than an outward artificial substitute for the inner union before God, and in God.Roos: It is credible that Ham and his son Canaan should have been especially zealous to hinder this counsel of God, according to which a hard destiny was to befall themthat is, that there should be a separation of the nations, so that Canaan should become the servant of Shem and Japheth.Luther: God comes down, that is, he gives special heed to them, he ceases to be forbearing. His coming down denotes his revelation of himself, his appearing in a new and great act, whether taken in the sense of mildness or severity. O that thou wouldst rend the heavens and come down (Isaiah 64).

Gen 11:7. The salvation of men is a matter of deep concern to our Lord; the boundary he would set to them is the barrier of grace and compassion.G. D. Krummacher: Human plans are confounded that the divine order may proceed from them. Such is the course of the worlds history.

Footnotes:

[1][Gen 11:1. , one lip and one words, as near as our English can come to it. LXX., ; Vulg., labii unius et sermonum eorumdem; the Syriac, , one tongue and one speech; and so the Targum of Onkelos, . So Greek writers describe those who speak the same language a and . Rashi interprets as referring to the thoughts and counsels rather than to language, regarding that as expressed by : They came to an understanding, or into one counsel, ; in which Vitringa agrees with him. Kaulen makes a labored distinction between and , the first of which he refers to the subjective element in speech, producing the grammatical form, the other to the objective, or the words as the matter of language. In proof, he cites such passages as Psa 12:3, , lip of flatteries; Exo 6:12, uncircumcised lip; Pro 12:19, lips of truth, etc.; Isa 33:19, , deep of lip But these examples only show that, when there is no contrast intended, , lip, may be taken generally for language (like lingua, the tongue; see Gen 11:9, below), including not only words and pronunciation, but all of thought and expression that belongs to it. To show that and are not tautological here, he quotes Psa 59:13, , the word of their lips. But this is needless. It is clear that they are not tautological. They express two distinct ideas; and yet we may doubt whether there is intended such a philosophical antithesis as Kaulen would bring out, though most true in itself, and most important to be considered in the science of language. The first thought would be the other way, namely, that () denoted the subjective, and lip, the outward or objective in language; since the first is used of a thought, thing, subject, that which is expressed, as well as the word or expression. The terms here are neither tautological, nor antithetical, but supplemental and intensive. It is the unity of language described in the most comprehensive manner: one lip, that is, one pronunciation, and the same words ( , every one of them (the plural taken distributively), that is, one name for each thing, and one way of speaking it. When they are put in direct contrast, then , instead of the subjective element, as Kaulen maintains, would denote mere sound in distinction from sense, as in the phrase , Isa 36:5; 2Ki 18:20; Pro 14:23speech of the lips, that is, mere empty boasting, sound without sense.T. L.]

[2][Gen 11:2., literally, in their pulling up. It is used of the taking up the stakes of a tent (see it in its primary sense, Isa 38:12), and is thus pictorially descriptive of a nomadic life, like the Arabic . It is used of the marching in the wilderness, and suggests here the idea of an encampment. The descendants of Noah had hitherto kept together in their rovings.T. L.]

[3] rendered from the East. Armenia, the supposed landing-place of the ark, was northwest of Shinar. This has led some to suppose, that the early human race made a detour through Persia, and so were travelling east when they came to Shinar. Others have regarded the ark-mountain as situated to the east, a view which can only be maintained by supposing the naming of the Armenian Ararat to belong to a later period, as a transfer from an older and more easterly region (see text, note p. 308). The original Scripture does not, of itself, determine the location as either east or west; so that the Samaritan version, that makes it Serendib (in Ceylon) is not to be rejected, as in itself false or absurd, any more than the Vulgate location in Armenia, or the Targum and Syriac mountains of Kardu, or the Arabian Mount Judi wherever that may have been. Rashi seems thus to have regarded it when he interprets as a journeying from (mountain of the East), mentioned just above, ch.Gen 10:30. Others would render eastward, or to the east, referring to such passages as Gen 13:11; Num 34:11; Jos 7:2; Jdg 8:11, etc., in all of which, except the first, the term denotes position instead of moving direction, and may, therefore, be regarded as determined from the standpoint, real or assumed, of the narrator or describer. Bochart regards as a name given to all the country beyond the Euphrates and Tigris, independent of the position of some parts of it in respect to other parts or to regions on the other side. This would seem the best way, if we must render from the east. But there is an older sense to the root, which may well be regarded as intended here. This primary sense is ante, before, or in front of. Hence its application to time as well as to space. The old country is afterwards called the East, and so becomes a word of local direction. This primary sense of anteriority gives the idea here demanded, which is not so much any particular direction (the geography not being the thing chiefly in view), as it is the general idea of progress. As they journeyed onward, , right ahead, in their nomadic rovingfrom one before to another, or from the place before them to one still farther onthey found a , or plain country. Gen 13:12 seems to be like this, and may be rendered in the same way: Abraham and Lot parted; the former settled () in the land where they were; or Abraham stopped, as we say in familiar English, but Lot journeyed on, . Compare Gen 11:2, , and they stopped there (in Shinar), where is in a similar contrast to the nomadic word . Or it may be taken as a word of position: he pitched his tent eastward. In this place the Targum of Onkelos has , in the East, regarding it as denoting position. So also the Arabic . The LXX., the Vulgate; and the Syriac render it from the East.T. L.]

[4][Gen 11:9. called its name Babel, , because there he confounded (balel = balbel) the language, etc. There is difficulty, sometimes, in the etymologies given in the Hebrew Bible, but this seems to be a remarkably clear and consistent one. It seems strange that Dr. Lange should show himself inclined to the other far-fetched derivation, which would make it mean either the gate of Bel, or the gate of El. Naming cities from the gate is not the most early way, though it came in afterwards, from the gate becoming the important place of commercial, judicial, and political procedure. Schelling is right in saying that , , for gate, is confined alone to the Arabic, of all the Shemitic tongues. It is entirely unknown to the Hebrew, and if it is ever found in any very late Syriac, it comes from the comparatively modern Arabic use. There is reason, too, to regard , notwithstanding a doubt expressed by Rawlinson (Rawlinson: Herod., i. p. 247), as the same with , the deified power, or personage, that appears all over the East,Baal, Lord, Master, and which becomes a general name for monarchs, like Pharaoh in Egypt. In the Babylonian, it becomes Bel or Belus; and in addition to the Phnician Baal, or Bal, (appearing in many Phnician and Carthaginian proper names, such as Hannibal, Adsrubal, etc.), we find a Lybian Belus (see Virg.: n., i. 621), a Lydian Bel, connected also with a Ninus (Herod., i. 7), besides the common Scriptural appellation of the idol deity so worshipped. In view of these facts, there must be rejected the idea of an early Babylonian monarch, to whom the name was exclusively given. They seem to have used the word in the plural, as the Phnicians did (, Baalim), and this accounts for the form it takes, as expressed in Greek, in the Pers of schylus, 657, . Though with a singular adjective, it can be nothing less than (Baalin), or, as the whole would be expressed in the later Hebrew, . To make this very ancient and memorable name (Babel) equivalent to the Arabic , or , gate of Bel or Baal, would be greatly straining etymology as well as history. Had such a derivation been found in the Bible, it would doubtless have been contemptuously rejected, by some who go so far from the Bible to get it. Nothing can be more direct and consistent than the etymology given in Genesis. The verb is the same with the intensive form , balbal, from which is softened after becoming a fixed and oft-pronounced name. , balbel, is an onomatope, exactly like our word babble, and its sense of confusion is probably secondary, coming from this early onomatopic use. The letters L and R are cognate and interchangeable, in the Greek as well as in the Shemitic tongues. Hence balbal and are the same. Barbarian did not, originally, mean savage, but one who speaks a different language, or who seems to the hearer to babble. It was the place where men first became barbarians to each other (see 1Co 14:11), though the name, as an onomatope, would seem still to belong to them all.T. L.]

[5][The more carefully the peculiar language of this Babel history is considered, and especially its heaven-defying look, the more probable will appear the view supported by Bryant, which regards it as the origin of the heathen fable of the war of the giants against the gods. The war of the Titans was probably the same, though it appears as a duplicate of the event in the Greek mythology. The latter, however, being set forth as the more ancient event, may, with some reason, be referred to the antediluvian rebellion described in Genesis 6 th. Both of these myths must have had some historical foundation in actual human history; for nothing can be more wild in itself, or more inconsistent with what we know, or may conceive, of the earliest thinking, than those representations of allegorical wars of which some writers are so fond. In the first period of human life, men were too much occupied with the great actual, and this is shown by the very exaggerations of the form which it assumed in history. Myth-making and allegorizing came in afterwards. The war of ideas, of which some talk, shows a previous philosophizing, however crude. The sight of great physical convulsions may have suggested some of these stories; but the actual occurrence of great events in human history was their more probable source.T. L.]

[6][There could, at this time, have been no great difference between Hebrew and Aramaic. Even in the days of Jacob and Laban, they could not have diverged much; since they appear to have well understood each other in the very beginning of Jacobs residence. Afterwards, when they parted, they gave two different names ( and , Gen 31:47) to the monumental heap of stones; but in so doing, they probably sought as much diversity as the growing change in their respective dialects would afford.T. L.]

[7] [Gen 11:5. , And God came down. The Targum of Onkelos renders this , and Jehovah was manifested, or revealed himself. So most of the other Jewish authorities. They derived the idea, probably, from such passages as Hos 5:15, where the opposite expression seems to represent God as retiring, and leaving the world to itself: , I will go and return to my place. So in the seventh verse, Onkelos renders it, Come, let us be revealed. The Arabic follows the Targum, and has . Compare also Mic 1:3, , For lo, Jehovah goes forth from his place, and comes down and walks upon the high places of the earth. There is a spirituality in Rabbi Schelomos interpretation of this which is lacking in most Christian commentators. It represents God, he says, as coming down from his throne of mercies, , to his throne of judgment, , as though the one were in the serene upper heavens (comp. Psa 113:6), and the other nearer to the sphere of this turbulent earth,implying also that the divine mercy is more retired, less visible to the sense, because more general and diffused, though seen by the eye of faith as sending rain upon the just and the unjust, whilst Gods judgments in the world are more manifest, more extraordinary, more palpable to the sense. It is his strange work, , Isa 28:21; , his extraordinary doing. The commentary of Aben Ezra on , Gen 11:5, is very noteworthy: This is thus said, because every thing that takes place in the world below depends from the powers that are above; as is seen in what is said (1Sa 2:3) , from the Heavens events are arranged (in our English Version it is given very poorly, actions are weighed). Wherefore God is said to ride upon the heavens ( , Deu 33:26); for thus the Scripture speaks with the tongue of men. With this citation of Aben Ezra, comp. Psa 68:5, Praise him that rideth on the Heavens by his name Jah, although many modern commentators differ from the Jewish in their rendering of . The riding on the Heavens is explained, by the commentator on Aben Ezra, as referring to the outer sphere (according to the astrological technics), in which there are inherent the higher or ultimate causalities, as Rabbi Tanchum says should be rendered in the verse above quoted, 1Sa 2:3 (see Tanchum: Comment. Lam 1:12), or , deflecting or turning causalities, as it is explained by him (see 1Ki 12:15). Similar interpretations are given by the Jewish commentaters of such words as , Gen 11:7, Go to now, Let us go down. They are used to express the most direct opposition between the ways and thoughts of men and those of God. Says Rabbi Schelomo: It is , measure for measure (par pari). Let us build up, say they, and scale the heavens; let us go down, says God, and defeat their impious thought. Other Rabbins, and Jewish grammarians, have a method of explaining such passages by a very concise yet most significant phrase. This mode of representing things, more humano, they call , the language or tongue of the event, or the action speaking. Thus Rabbi Tanchum characterizes the words , the Lord not see it, Lam 3:36, as , the tongue or speech of the condition (the supposed language of the wicked actions just before described), whether regarded as actually uttered or not. Thus here, God speaks in what he does, in most direct contrariety to the ways and thoughts of men. The event to be narrated by the sacred historian is the divine intervention in counteraction of human wickedness and folly. To be intelligible, it necessarily includes some statement of the divine thoughts or purposes, as inseparable parts of the res gest. This must be done after the manner of men, or it cannot be done at all. These divine purposes and acts are, therefore, represented as speaking. In fact they do speak; and this is what they say most emphatically. It is analogous to the frequent usage in Homeric Greek of , to speak, for , to think; and, in Hebrew, of , word, for thought or thing,a connection of ideas which is obvious in the English think and thing, as also in the German ding and denken. This language of the event, if it would be expressive, must be characteristic and idiomatic. The , go to, of man, is met by a direct response on the part of Deity, and to this end the very same term is used, not ironically, as Lange thinks, but as the most speaking form of the antithesis. This is not like the language of the prophet who hears words spoken in vision. In that case they are truly, though subjectively heard, as the mediate language of the inspiring power, and not alone of the inspired human medium. But in such narrations as these, nothing could better describe the rhetorical peculiarity than this formula of the Jewish critics. It is the language of the occasion, not as uttered objectively, or heard subjectively, but still as virtually representing most important parts of the event.

Those who are offended at such a style cannot consistently stop short of a denial of all revelation, as either actual or possible. When we make the objection, we should consider how far it goes. Not only is there shut out the thought of any direct divine intervention in the worlds history, but also every idea whatever of any divine action or personality. Look at the question carefully, and we are compelled to say that thinking, in any such way as we think, and even knowing, in the sense of any particular recognition of anything finite as finite, are as truly anthropopathic exercises as remembering and speaking. It is truly pitiable, therefore, when Rosenmller, and other commentators like him, indulge in their usual apologizing and patronizing talk about the simple belief of the early ages, deos descendere, atque, ut ex antiqua persuasione credebatur, ad humanum morem consilia agitare, deliberare, rebus ex omni parte perpensis, decernere,that the gods actually come down to see, etc. How far have we got, in these respects, beyond these simple early people? What advantage has the most rationalizing commentator over them in the use of any language that will enable him to think of God, or talk of God, without denying the divine personality on the one hand, or bringing in something impliedly and essentially anthropopathic on the other. This language is as much for one age as for another; since here all ages, and all human minds, are very much on a par. But why, it may be asked, could there not have been used terms more general, and which would not have suggested such crude conceptions? It might have been simply said, God intervened to prevent the accomplishment of evil purposes, or he provided means in the course of his general providence, or government of nature and the world, for such an end. This, it may be thought, would have sounded better, and better preserved the dignity of the Scripture. But what is an intervention, but a coming between, and a prevention but a going before, and a, providing, or a providence, but a looking into, a coming down to see what the children of men are doing? We gain nothing by them. Instead of helping the matter, our most philosophical language would only be the substituting of worn-out terms, whose early primary images had faded out, or ceased to affect us conceptually, for other language equally representative of the idea, whilst excelling in that pictorial vividness in which truly dwells that which we most need. This is the suggestive and emotive power, making words something more than arbitrary signs of unknown quantities, like the x y z of the algebraist, where the things signified are mere notions, having no meaning or value except as they preserve the equilibrium of a logical equation. We would have the Bible talk to us philosophically: the infinite intelligence conditions the finite; the divine power is the conserving principle ever immanent in nature. But hear how much better the Scripture says this: the God of old is thy dwelling-place, and underneath are the everlasting arms, , the arms of eternity, the arms that hold up the world. The divine wisdom has adopted this style. It is a mode of diction ever fresh, yet equal to any other as a representative of that which is strictly ineffable, that is, un-utterable in any of those sense-forms in which all human language must terminate, though still belonging to the spiritual intelligence, and known by it as something that truly is. Paul once heard the divine ideas expressed in their own proper words (2Co 12:4), but he could not translate these into the speech of the lower sphere. The language of the Bible is the best that could be given us. It may present stumbling-blocks to the careless reader, or to those who wish to stumble, but still is it true, that the more we study the Holy Scriptures, even in their earliest parts, the more reason do we find to thank God that they are written just as they are.T. L]

[8][The senses of flowing together which Gesenius gives, or of extending, swelling, as here presented, are not found in any use of the root or , but are accommodated, as supposed primary senses, to the meaning required. It is better, however, to deduce it from the sense of interiority, inclusion (implying, exclusion, seclusion, separateness), which is common in the Chaldan and Syriac. Thus regarded, it would be the political, rather than any physical ideaa nation as a political unity by itself, separate from all otherswhilst would denote association. A commuuity within itself in its two aspects, of outward exclusion, and inner binding.T. L.]

[9][How easily this is done, whether by a power purely physical or divine, is seen in the cases of paralytics, where, the mind remaining clear, the connection between it and the vocal organs is suddenly changed; so that though speech is not lost, its utterances are misplaced, the name of one thing is given to another, or the connection between the usual word and the usual idea seems almost wholly broken up. The individual derangement is a very mysterious thing, as inexplicable now as in the earliest ages of the world. National and popular derangements are more rare, but history records strange movements, that suggest the thought, as the truest, if not the only possible, explanation. Our knowledge of man, of the immeasurable deep within him, of the infinite unknown around and above him, is too small to warrant any positive denial of such statements, or the possibility of such events, whether regarded as supernatural, or as falling within those natural causalities of which we talk so much, and yet, comparatively, know so little.T. L.]

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

CONTENTS

The sacred historian relates in this Chapter an awful proof of man’s fallen nature, and thereby confirms the divine declaration concerning it, that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. For notwithstanding that the flood had swept away the whole human race, excepting that part preserved with Noah in the ark; and God’s displeasure against sin had manifested itself in this dreadful judgment, yet the sin of man soon broke out afresh; and, in the daring attempt of building the tower of Babel, evidently discovered that man ventured to defy the Omnipotency of God. The relation of this foolish, as well as impious undertaking, is contained in this Chapter, together with, the divine judgment which followed. Towards the close of the chapter, the Reader is first introduced to the history of Abram, of whom such honourable testimony is afterwards given throughout the whole volume of Scripture.

Gen 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

Happy world, may it not be said, when no confusion or misapprehension could arise from a diversity of languages! What a train of evils hath this variety alone produced in the earth in after ages! Is it not more than probable that this was the holy tongue, (Hebrew), and learned first in Paradise?

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Youth and After

Gen 11:32

‘And Terah died in Haran.’ What of that?

It was not until they came to Haran that they touched, as it were, their first footprints and found the old religion. There had been little temptation to pause before on the score of a people’s worship, but when, worn out in body and mind, Abram suddenly came upon the old religion, his journeyings after another faith and form of worship were at an end. It was Abram the younger man who withstood the temptations of Haran.

I. You see the thought underlying this bit of prosaic information. It simply means that the years close down the possibilities of a certain kind of moral Exodus. If you wait until you get into years before you find right principles, form good resolutions well then it is better to make some start in the right direction, but why pile up the odds that start you never will?

The enthusiasms of old men are as rare as they are short-lived unless they are evolved out of earlier and worthy days. I am far from saying that old age necessarily blocks the way to great attempts or to conspicuous success in them. All history would cry out against such a statement. There is an old age we delight to honour and which reverses the ordinary attitude to it in the general world.

II. We may apply what has been so far advanced, first to pleasures, and secondly to something more important to you than old age, and that is middle life.

( a ) To everything, says the preacher, there is a time and a season, and it must be that youth is the time for amusements and pleasures which are not so much the privilege of youth as native to it. We are told that Darwin in his old age expressed regret that he had deprived himself of so many of the pleasures and resources of life by his concentration upon that study the results of which have made his name so justly famous, and no young man should give place to a doctrine of work which excludes his right to the joyous abandon of his years.

( b ) When a man begins to sight the middle years he learns to know himself as never before or after. This is the stage where increase of knowledge often means increase of sorrow. It is in truth the sorrow of finding out our limitations, which in their first acquaintance often seem more appalling than they actually are. While youth may be saved by hope of what is to be, middle life is often lost in the drab reality of what is, and even where middle life has won success in the things men covet, and after which they strive, it may be that that success is just deadly in its reaction of monotony. Men do not always go under because they cannot do things. They fail not because they do not know what it is well to do, but because they do not choose to attempt it. And why do they not choose? So far as this question affects middle life it is largely because so few of us have the grit to face its difficulties.

Ambrose Shepherd, Men in the Making, p. 1.

Fuente: Expositor’s Dictionary of Text by Robertson

On the Building of Babel

Gen 11

Comparing this account with our own method of life and art, it is clear that from the beginning of time men have been doing pretty much the same thing all the world over. The world’s story is but short; it is very much like a series of repetitions: the actors, indeed, have been innumerable, but the drama has always been contracted, and seldom profound. The actors have made noise enough, but when there has been a little break through the dust, we have observed that they have not always made equal progress. We have a short Bible, because we have a short life. We have a fragmentary Bible, because we have a fragmentary human story. We have a Bible that apparently contradicts itself, because we have a life full of discrepancies because part of us is Divine and part of us earthly because we have many chipped links, many unmatched and unmatchable patterns, which no skill can put into anything like decent unity. The world, too, is but a little world. Men jump together again and again as if they could not escape one another’s presence, and as for thinking, strife of mind, intellectual projections and conceptions, originalities there are none; variations many, but no originalities. We are still in the land of Shinar, plotting with one another, burning bricks, building cities and towers, and being thrown from depth to depth of confusion. We are shut up in a very small prison, and can see but little through the narrow grating of our separate cells. What can we do, then? What is our calling? It is to try to alter the moral tone of our work; we must burn bricks, build cities, and erect towers in the right spirit; and we must try to get to heaven, not as the builders of Babel did. If we get to heaven at all, it will never be through the dark and rickety staircases of our own invention. Let us, then, read the story of Babel together, and gather from it what we may.

“And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.”

Unanimity is nothing, considered strictly in itself. It is of no value that we say, in excuse of this or that deed, “It was done unanimously.” Men may do wrong things unanimously, as well as things that are right. We must distinguish between union and conspiracy; we must distinguish between identity and mere association for a given object. Twelve directors may be of one language and of one speech, but the meaning of their unity may be self-enrichment, at the expense of unsuspecting men, who have put their little all into their keeping and direction. It is nothing, therefore, to talk about unanimity in itself considered. We must, in all these things, put the moral question, “What is the unanimity about?” “Is this unanimity moving in the right direction?” If it be in a wrong direction, then unanimity is an aggravation of sin; if it be in a right direction, then union is power, and one-heartedness is triumph. But it is possible that unanimity may be but another word for stagnation. There are words in our language which are greatly misunderstood and unanimity is one of them; peace is another. When many persons say peace, what do they mean? A living, intelligent, active cooperation, where there is mutual concession, where there is courtesy on every hand, where there is independent conviction, and yet noble concert in life? Not at all. They say that a Church is unanimous, and a Church is at peace, when a correct interpreter would say it was the unanimity of the grave, the peace of death. So I put in a word here of caution and of explanation: “The whole earth was of one language, and of one speech”; here is a point of unanimity, and yet there is a unanimous movement in a wrong direction.

“And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly;… and they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven.”

There are times in life when lucky ideas strike men; when there is a kind of intellectual spring-tide in their nature, when men rise and say, “I have got it! Go to, this is it!” And in the bright hours when such ideas strike one, the temptation is to be a little contemptuous in reference to dull men who are never visited by conceptions, so bright and original as we deem them. A man has been in great perplexity, month after month, and suddenly he says, “Go to, the solution is now before me; I see my way right out of this dark place”; and he heightens his tone, as the joy swells in his heart. That is right. We could not do without intellectual birthdays; we could not always be carrying about a dead, leaden brain, that never sees light or shouts victory. We like these moments of inspiration to break in upon the dull monotony of such a lifetime as ours. So it is perfectly right that men should express their new conceptions their new programme and lay out a bold policy in a clear and confident tone. But are all our ideas so very bright? When we see our way to brick-making, is it always in the right direction? When we set our mind upon founding a city and building a tower the top of which shall rest against the stars, is it right? You see that question of “right” comes in again and again, and in proportion as a man wishes to live a truly Divine life he will always say, before going to his brick-making and his city-founding and his tower-building, “Now, is this right?” Many of us could have built great towers, only we knew that we should be building downwards if we had set our hands to such work as has often tempted us. Do not let us look coldly upon apparently unsuccessful men, and say, “Look at us; we have built a great city and tower; and you, where are you? stretching in the dust and grovelling in nothing.” They could have built quite as large a tower as ours; they could have been quite as far up in the clouds as we are, only we had perhaps less conscience than they had. When we saw a way to burning bricks, we burned them; and a way to establishing towers, we founded them; and they, poor creatures, unsuccessful men, began to pray about it, and to wonder if it was right, and to ask casuistical questions, and to rack themselves upon conscience; and so they have done no building! And yet they may have built. Who can tell? All buildings are not made of brick; all men do not require to lay hot brickfields, and burn clay, in order to build. It may be found one day, when the final inspection takes place, that the man who has built nothing visible has really built a palace for the residence of God. It may be found, too, that some successful people have nothing but bricks nothing but bricks, bricks, bricks! Then it will be seen who the true builders were. What I pause here to say is this: We may have bright ideas, we may have (to us) new conceptions; there are, to our thinking, original ways of doing things; now and again cunning plans of overcoming difficulties strike us. Do I condemn this intellectual activity? No; I simply say, Let your intellect and your conscience go together; do not be onesided men; do not be living altogether out of the head, be living out of your moral nature as well; and if it be right, then build the tower with all industry and determination. Let it be strong and lofty, and God shall come down upon your work and glorify it, and claim it as his own.

“A tower, whose top may reach unto heaven.”

“And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded.”

“Now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do.”

Here we are brought face to face with the great question of the discipline of human imagination. Life that is lived entirely in the imagination is lived wastefully. We are not to condemn imagination, for most truly imagination is a Divine gift; but it is a gift which is seldom, if ever, to be exercised alone. Our imagination must take counsel of our judgment, and our judgment must act in cooperation with our heart, so that there may be unanimity in all our faculties in carrying out the great objects of life. It is a terrible thing for any man to be given over to the unrestrained dominion of his fancy. Our imagination becomes intoxicated, and we are the victims of dreamings which may lead us into the wildest excesses, causing us to overlook all social claims and all Divine obligations, and to work only for our own aggrandisement and strength. Imagination never thinks; it only dreams. Imagination never reasons; it flies away, not knowing whither it is going. Imagination is never sober; it is always intoxicated with burning desire. I might challenge some of you today, to tell me whether you are not living lives of riotous imagination; dreaming of new plans of securing wealth, of novel projects for the defrauding of unsuspecting men, and whether in this awful excitement you are not forgetting the common duties of life. Men cannot always live upon the wings of their imagination; they must stand still, pause, think, reason, pray; and then, if their imagination can assist them to overcome difficulties, they are at liberty to follow all the will of their fancy. Let us take our starting-point from simple truth; let us hold deep and solemn consultation with the Spirit of Righteousness; let us know that our greatest power is little more than weakness; and then we shall walk without stumbling; and though our tower be not built very loftily, it will be built with a stability which God himself will never allow to be shaken.

“Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.”

This brings before us a hint of the unknown resources of God, in the matter of punishing those who disobey his will. Who could have thought of this method of scattering the builders of the city? God does not send a fire upon the builders; no terrible plague poisons the air; yet in an instant each workman is at a loss to understand the other, and each considers all the rest as but raving maniacs! Imagine the bewildering and painful scene! Men who have been working by each other’s side, days and weeks, are instantly conscious of inability to understand one another’s speech! New sounds, new accents, new words, but not a ray of intelligence in all! “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hand of the living God.” God has innumerable ways of showing his displeasure at human folly and human crime. A man may be pursuing a course of prosperity, in which he is ignoring all that is moral and Divine, and men may be regarding him as the very model of success; yet, in an instant, Almighty God may blow upon his brain, and the unsuccessful man may sit down in a defeat which can never be reversed. God is not confined to one method of punishment. He touches a man’s bones, and they melt! he breathes upon a man’s brain, and henceforth he is not able to think. He comes in at night-time, and shakes the foundations of man’s most trusted towers, and in the morning there is nought but a heap of ruins. He disorganises men’s memories, and in an instant they confuse all the recollection of their lifetime. He touches man’s tongue, and the fluent speaker becomes a stammerer. He breaks the staff in twain, and he who was relying upon it is thrown down in utter helplessness. We know but little of what God means when he says, “Heaven”; that word gives us but a dim hint of the infinite light, and blessedness, and triumph which are in reserve for the good. We have but a poor conception of what God means when he says, “Hell”; that word is but a flickering spark compared with the infinite distress, the endless ruin and torment which must befall every man who defies his Maker.

Speaking of this confusion of language, may I not be permitted to inquire whether even in our own English tongue there is not today very serious confusion? Do men really mean words to be accepted in their plain common-sense? Does not the acute man often tell his untrained client what he intends to do in language which has double meanings? Do we not sometimes utter the words that have one meaning to the world and another meaning to our own hearts? Yea does not always mean yea, nor does nay always mean nay; men sign papers with mental reservations; men utter words in their common meaning, and to themselves they interpret these words with secret significations. The same words do not mean the same thing under all circumstances, and as spoken by different speakers. When a poor man says “rich,” he means one thing; when a millionaire says “rich,” he means something very different. Let us consider that there is morality even in the use of language. Let no man consider himself at liberty to trifle with the meaning of words. Language is the medium of intercourse between man and man, and on the interpretation of words great results depend. It behoves us, therefore, who profess to be followers of Jesus Christ, so to speak as to leave ourselves without the painful reflection of having taken refuge in ambiguous expressions for the sake of saving ourselves from unpleasant results. It will be a sign that God is really with us as a nation, when a pure language is restored unto us when man can trust the word of man, and depend with entire confidence upon the honour of his neighbour.

What shall we carry away from this meditation? Man must work; but he may work in a wrong spirit and with a wrong intent. We may do the right thing in a wrong way. What we have to beware of is atheistic building! “He builds too low who builds beneath the skies.” “Other foundation can no man lay than that is laid”: “Jesus Christ himself being the chief cornerstone.” The word of warning to every man is this, “Let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.” A building may be noble in design, ample in magnitude, commodious and convenient in all its appointments, but the one great question relates to the foundation! Of what value is it that we build loftily and broadly, with an eye to all that is beautiful in proportion, and satisfactory in arrangement, if all the while we are building upon the sand? The fires will come, or the floods will descend, or the great winds will conspire to try our work, and though our work itself suffer loss, we shall be saved if we be resting upon the right foundation which God himself has laid. I have spoken especially of ambition. I have not dissuaded young men from being ambitious; I have rather sought to stimulate them to greater desires and more comprehensive plans. At the same time, I wish to caution them against ambition that is atheistic. You hear of men being the architects of their own fortunes; and there is a sense in which that expression conveys sentiments that are truly laudable. I wish, however, to alter the phraseology; henceforth let us consider God as the Architect of our fortunes, and ourselves but the builders working under his direction. Do not let us seek to be both architect and builder. “In all thy ways acknowledge God, and he will direct thy paths.” We shall never be relieved from the discipline of work; the great trials of service will constantly be allotted to us; the one thing to be assured of is, that we are moving along the designs which God himself has set before us, and then, how stormy soever may be the days in which we labour, and how many soever the difficulties with which we have to contend, the building shall surely be completed, even to the putting on of the top-stone.

Do I immediately speak to any poor crushed man, whose tower during the recent commercial panics has been thrown down to the dust? But a short time ago you had a good social position, you lived in comfort, if not in luxury, your name was a watchword of confidence among men of honour; but today you are surrounded by the ruins of your fortune, and your children are almost reduced to beggary. Let us speak about such matters with all tenderness, yet without shrinking from the moral aspects of life. How was your tower built? Did you build it atheistically? Did you live entirely in the realm of your imagination, losing all self-restraint, and plunging into the most riotous excesses of speculation? If so, the explanation of the throwing down of your tower is not far to seek. On the other hand, if you were building honestly, and have been victimised by evil-minded men, it will one day be shown to you that the destruction of your tower has been ordered by Almighty God, and so sanctified as to bring into your heart a stronger faith, a tenderer love, and a more enduring patience. Do not say that all is lost simply because all is thrown down. The foundation abideth for ever; continue to build upon that, and be assured of the final reward. I do not know but that panics are sent of God himself, often directly, for the chastening and purification of man. Uninterrupted prosperity might prove itself to be the direst affliction which could befall society. Do we know what plagues might be engendered by the continuous shining of a cloudless sun? The high winds which try men’s buildings, and often throw them down, are sent for the cleansing of the air.

Do I speak to any who have but little standing-place in the world, to men who have never built a city or a tower? Let me say to such, “In my Father’s house are many mansions”! We ourselves may not have built anything that deserves the name of a city or a tower, but Jesus Christ has gone away to prepare a place for us, and we who today are the children of want, having hardly where to lay our head, shall be called into a city of glory. The poor Christian has no reason to be discouraged so far as the great future is concerned; today there is little about him that men may call attractive; today he is the child of want, but insomuch as he is in Jesus Christ he holds a title to an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away.

Let us now go out again into the world from hearing the word of the Lord; let us resume our building, and in doing so let us invoke the presence and the guidance of Infinite Wisdom through all the processes of our life. Our business is not to build quickly, but to build upon a right foundation and in a right spirit. Life is more than a mere competition as between man and man; it is not who can be done first, but who can work best; it is not who can rise highest in the shortest time, but who is working most patiently and lovingly in accordance with the designs of God.

Fuente: The People’s Bible by Joseph Parker

XVI

ORIGIN OF NATIONS AND LANGUAGES

Gen 10:1-11:9

Genesis, section six: “These are the generations of the sons of Noah.”

1. Unity of stock and speech.

2. Attempt at centralization.

3. Confusion of tongues.

4. Consequent grouping into nations.

5. Assignment of their respective territories.

6. Dispersion to allotted homes.

The tenth chapter of Genesis, with the first nine verses of the eleventh chapter, constitutes our sixth division of the book, under the title: These are the generations of the sons of Noah. This section closes the Bible history of man as a race. Next to the account of the creation, and the fall of man, and of the flood, it is the most valuable gem of literature. Indeed the most forcible writers fall short of the reality in attempting to express the significance and value of this record. Some of them say that it is the most ancient and reliable account of the origin of nations. But this language implies that there are in the world’s literature parallel histories, though later and less reliable. But there is no other account. This history has no parallel. It is unique, without a model and without a shadow. It is both ancient and solitary. Moreover, to call it the ancient and solitary history of merely the origin of nations falls far below the facts. It not only cites the sires from whom all peoples have descended, but also tells us by whom, where, why, how, and when the people of one stock and tongue were parted into separate nations and divers tongues, and by whom and in what lifetime came the allotment, of their respective territories. It is therefore the foundation of ethnology, philology, and geography; the root of history, prophecy, and religion.

UNITY OF STOCK AND SPEECH The whole of the tenth chapter, with the first nine verses of the eleventh, should be treated as one section. The tenth chapter cannot be understood without this paragraph of the eleventh chapter. The table of the nations comes first, and then follows the explanation of the division into nations. So that in order of time the nine verses of the eleventh chapter precede nearly all of the tenth chapter. We therefore take as our starting point a clause of the sixth verse of the eleventh chapter: “And Jehovah said, Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language.” Their oneness of speech is expressed by two discriminating words: “And the whole land was of one lip, and one stock of words.” “Stock of words” means the materials of languages. “Lip,” one of the organs of articulation, denotes manner of speaking, or the use of the material. Family ties and common speech hold them together. Hence as they multiplied and began to move out for homes, the trend of the movement was in one direction only. A proverb of our day is, “Westward the march of Empire takes its way.” It was not so in the beginning. The movement was toward the rising, not the setting sun. As the years roll by and the population rapidly increases, this eastward tide of emigration becomes as a mighty river in volume. But all migrations of men fall under some leadership. The most daring, capable and dominant spirit, by sheer force of character and qualities, naturally forges to the front and directs and controls the movement, and as power increases, his ambition soars. He begins to scheme and plan toward selfish ends. Our record names the man. Not without adequate design does the author in giving his tables of nations turn aside to sketch an episode when he comes to a certain man. “Ham begat Cush, and Gush begat Nimrod; and he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before Jehovah: . . . And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. Out of that land he went forth into Assyria, and builded Nineveh and Calah (the same is the great city).” This descendant of Ham becomes a leader. His name signifies “The Rebel,” or “we shall rebel.” He makes himself a king. The beginning of his kingdom was Babel in the land of Shinar.

This episode of the tenth chapter connects with the migration eastward in the eleventh chapter: “And it came to pass, as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said to one another, Come, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. And they said, Come, let us build us a city” (Gen 11:2-4 ). In v. II we find that the city was Babel. Here, then, we find the man, the leader. He was a mighty hunter, this mighty man, as later (1Sa 24:11 ; Jer 16:16 ), a hunter of men. The expression, “before the Lord,” evidently means that he pushed his designs of whatever kind in open and brazen defiance of God’s sight and rule.

ATTEMPT AT CENTRALIZATION There now comes into his mind this ambitious scheme, the establishment of a world empire. To accomplish this there must be a center of unity, a city, and to insure stability and to hedge against the natural and disintegrating fear of another deluge there must be a refuge. To induce submission on the part of his following they must be supplied with a motive: “let us make a name.” This brings the situation into similarity with the conditions that preceded and necessitated the deluge as set forth in Gen 6:4 , the days of the giants and the mighty men, men of renown. This inordinate thirst for fame is idolatrv It is the most cruel of the passions. Everything beautiful, good, holy, and true goes down before it. As an illustration consider the ambition attributed to an ancient painter: “Parrhasius, a painter of Athens, among the Olythian captives Philip of Macedonia brought home to sell, bought one very old man. And when he had him at his house put him to death with extreme torture and torment, the better, by his example, to express the pains and passions of his Prometheus whom he was then about to paint.”

On this excerpt N. P. Willis writes his famous poem, “Parrhasius.” According to the poet when the tortured victim asks for pity the painter replies:

I’d rack thee though I knew a thousand lives were perishing in thine

What were ten thousand to a fame like mine

Again, when the dying captive threatens him with the hereafter, the painter mocks him by denial of future existence:

Yet there’s a deathless name!

A spirit that the smouldering vault shall spurn,

And like a steadfast planet mount and burn

And though its crown of flame

Consume my brain to ashes as it shone

By all the fiery stars I I’d bind it on!

Aye though it bid me rifle

My heart’s last fount for its insatiate thirst

Though every life-strung nerve be maddened first

Though it should bid me stifle

The yearning in my throat for my sweet child,

And taunt its mother till my brain went wild

All I would do it all Sooner than die, like a dull worm, to rot

Thrust foully unto earth to be forgot!

Upon which the poet concludes:

How like a mounting devil in the heart

Rules the unreined ambition! Let it once

But play the monarch, and its haughty brow

Glows with beauty that bewilders thought

And unthrones peace forever. Putting on

The very pomp of Lucifer, it turns

The heart to ashes, and with not a spring

Left in the bosom for the spirit’s lip,

We look upon our splendour and forget

The thirst of which we perish!

We are thus prepared to understand the history: “And they said, Come, let us build a city, and a tower whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make a name; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth” (Gen 11:4 ).

All popular movements of this kind are directed by leaders who suggest the watchwords and crystallize the agitation into forms of their own choosing. The sin of the movement was manifold. It meant rebellion against God and ruin to the race. The divine plan was diffusion, and the command was to push out in all directions, not one; to occupy and subdue all the earth. But Nimrod’s plan was to keep the people all together under his leadership to serve his ends. The object is thus expressed: “Lest we be scattered.” To this day tyrants pursue the same plan and put embargoes on outward movements. And to this day God’s providence has thwarted them by bringing about some discovery or attraction that draws out and diffuses population, relieving the congestion at, the crowded centers of life. A very interesting lesson of history is the study of the ways of Providence in sending out migrations of men to colonize the unoccupied parts of the earth. More wonderful and interesting is the way of that Providence in dispersing Christians that they may carry the gospel to all the world. The one thing that made Nimrod’s plan of centralization possible was the one language of the people. The audacity and rebellion of the plan provoked divine inquisition and judgment. To allow its successful execution would defeat every purpose of God concerning world occupation and bring about a corruption of the race equal to that of the antediluvians. A world crisis had arrived. The case called for heroic treatment and instant relief. What was the divine remedy?

CONFUSION OF TONGUES “Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. So Jehovah scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off building the city. Therefore was the name of it called Babel; because Jehovah did there confound the language of all the earth; and from thence did Jehovah scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth” (Gen 11:7-9 ).

This is one of the mightiest and most far-reaching miracles of history. It transcends in importance all the plagues of Egypt. Indeed it finds no counterpart until the descent of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Dr. Conant thus quotes from Schelling’s Philosophy of Mythology:

Humanity cannot have left that condition, in which there was no distinction of peoples, but only of races, without a spiritual crisis, which must have been of the deepest significance, must have taken place in the basis of human consciousness itself. . . . For we cannot conceive of different peoples without different languages; and language is something spiritual. If difference of peoples is not something that was not from the first, but is something that has arisen, then must this also hold true of the different languages. . . . Here we fall in with the oldest account of the human race, the Mosaic writings; toward which so many are disinclined, only because they know not what to do with it, can neither understand nor use it. Genesis puts the rise of peoples in connection with the rise of different languages; but in such a way, that the confounding of the language is the cause, the rise of the peoples the effect.

To evade the significance of this miracle the higher critics resort to their usual refuge, the document hypothesis. They magnify the tenth chapter and disparage the first nine verses of the eleventh. The former, an Elohist document, is credible; the latter, a Jehovah document, is incredible. They claim that chapter 10 leaves us to suppose that the nations were distributed upon the face of the earth in obedience to the natural laws which govern colonization and migration, and that the present striking varieties in human languages are wholly the natural result of the dispersion of the nations. The tenth chapter does not leave us to any such suppositions, the episode of Nimrod, the references to Peleg, and the Gen 10:5 ; Gen 10:20 ; Gen 10:31 , summing up respectively the families of Japheth, Ham, and Shem, demand the explanation in the next chapter. When asked to account naturally for these striking and irreconcilable varieties in the few great parent languages, they reply: Philology has as yet nothing very definite to say as to the possibility of reducing to one the larger families of human speech. In fact, their oracle, philology, is not merely dubious it is dumb. Dr. Conant well sums up all that philology can do with this problem:

The diversities in the languages of the earth present a problem which philosophy has in vain laboured to solve. Comparative philology has shown, however, that many different languages are grouped together by common affinities, as branches of the same family, all having the same original language for their common parent. Notwithstanding the great number and diversity of languages, they may all be traced to a very few original parent tongues. The difficulty lies in the essential and irreconcilable diversity between those several parent tongues, not the remotest affinities existing to indicate a common origin, or any historical relation; a problem for which speculative philosophy can find no solution.

They cannot account for it naturally, but deny the supernatural account, passing the matter by with a sneer, “Oh that account is found only in the Jehovah document.” Or if they wish to be a little more respectful, they say, “The fact is that here, as elsewhere, the Jehovist aims not so much at presenting historical information as showing the ethical and religious significance of the leading points in history and the chief changes in man’s condition.” How happens it that they have such an infallible knowledge of the aim of the Jehovist, and how can there be an ethical and religious significance of history, which is not history but falsehood? If the historical element of the first nine verses of the eleventh chapter be eliminated there is nothing of any kind left, out of which to construct ethics or religion. If the aim of the writer is not history, then words are not signs of ideas. It would be far manlier and more consistent to follow the more destructive higher critics and expunge what they call the Jehovistic record as spurious and unworthy, than to weakly hold on to it and discredit it. The following maxims of literary composition have long obtained:

Never introduce a god into the story unless there be an occasion for a god.

When introduced, let his speech and deeds be worthy of a god.

Let the result of his intervention be worthy of a god. Here was a worthy occasion. Race ruin was imminent and unavoidable by human means. Here was speech and deed worthy of divinity, and results too grand and far-reaching and beneficial to admit of human conception or execution. The author of the book follows his own appropriate method in the use of the divine means. When the divine being, invisible and unapproachable and unknowable, is the subject, the name is Elohim. Whenever it is God manifested particularly by interventions of mercy, it is Jehovah and Jehovah God.

CONSEQUENT GROUPINGS INTO NATIONS The first effect of the confusion of tongues is the stopping of the work, from inability to comprehend each other. The consciousness that a supernatural power had intervened would necessarily fill them with dread, lest a greater evil befall them if they persisted in disobedience. Those who could best understand each other would naturally group themselves and form the nucleus of a separate nation. And this grouping also was naturally according to family origin, whether of Shem, Ham, or Japheth, thus accounting for the three great root languages whose barriers philology cannot pass. This harmonized also with

ASSIGNMENT OF THEIR RESPECTIVE TERRITORIES The proof of this divine allotment of territory is abundant in the lesson and elsewhere. In summing up the histories of the sons of Japheth the record says, “Of these were the isles of the nations divided in their lands, every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.” Similarly of Ham: “These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, in their nations.” And of Shem: “These are the sons of Shem, after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, after their nations.” More particular is the testimony in Gen 10:25 : “And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.” This evidence not only establishes the fact of the division of territory, but shows that the event was so extraordinary and impressive as to give a name to a child born at the time, namely, Peleg, i.e., Division. It is not probable that they could agree among themselves as to the partition of territory. This question could be settled only by supreme authority. And to this fact testify the Scriptures. Paul said at Athens, “And he made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation” (Act 17:26 ). But the author of Genesis in another book puts the matter beyond controversy:

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, When he separated the children of men, He set the bounds of the peoples According to the number of the children of Israel. Deu 32:8

This allotment of territory, after the confusion of tongues was followed by an irresistible divine impulse that brought about

DISPERSION TO ALLOTTED HOMES

They had said, “Lest we be scattered.” When God acts the record says, “So Jehovah scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off building the city. Therefore was the name of it called Babel; because Jehovah did there confound the language of all the earth; and from thence did Jehovah scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth” (Gen 11:8-9 ). It has been objected that the division of the land which gave rise to the naming of Peleg, came too early to be connected with the dispersion following the confusion of tongues. The objection is ill advised. The division and assignment of territory long preceded the dispersion. The very sin of the attempt at centralization consisted in its deliberate rebellion against this prior division. In the order of our chapter we have considered the division after the confusion of tongues, not because it was then ordained, but because it was then enforced. We are now prepared to take up chapter 10, and consider specially the parts of the earth occupied by the descendants of the several sons of Noah, which, however, is reserved for another chapter.

QUESTIONS 1. What can you Bay of the value of the tenth chapter of Genesis, (1) as literature; (2) as history; (3) as instruction?

2. In order of time, which comes first. Gen 11:1-9 , or the tenth chapter, and why this order?

3. What, then, was the starting point and what held the people together at this time?

4. As they multiplied, what was the trend of their movement and what modern proverb to the contrary?

5. Who became their leader, what was the meaning of his name, what great cities did he build and where?

6. What was the meaning of “a mighty hunter” and “before the Lord”?

7. What was his ambitious scheme, the essentials to its accomplishment and what was its motive?

8. Give an illustration of cruel, unbridled ambition.

9. What was the manifold sin of this movement and the divine remedy for it?

10. What was God’s plan of defeating such movements in modern times?

11. What was the counterpart of this mighty miracle?

12. What is Dr. Conant’s explanation of the rise of the different peoples?

13. How do the critics try to evade the significance of this miracle and what is this expositor’s reply?

14. According to Dr. Conant what has comparative philology shown with respect to the many different languages?

15. What is the position of the more respectful (mediating) critics and this expositor’s reply?

16. What three maxims of literary composition obtain and their application to the matter in hand?

17. What was the first effect of the confusion of tongues and how account for the three great root languages?

18. What is the Scripture proof of the divine allotment?

19. What brought about the dispersion, and how?

20. What objection is sometimes urged with respect to the dispersion, and the reply thereto?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

XVI

ORIGIN OF NATIONS AND LANGUAGES

Gen 10:1-11:9

Genesis, section six: “These are the generations of the sons of Noah.”

1. Unity of stock and speech.

2. Attempt at centralization.

3. Confusion of tongues.

4. Consequent grouping into nations.

5. Assignment of their respective territories.

6. Dispersion to allotted homes.

The tenth chapter of Genesis, with the first nine verses of the eleventh chapter, constitutes our sixth division of the book, under the title: These are the generations of the sons of Noah. This section closes the Bible history of man as a race. Next to the account of the creation, and the fall of man, and of the flood, it is the most valuable gem of literature. Indeed the most forcible writers fall short of the reality in attempting to express the significance and value of this record. Some of them say that it is the most ancient and reliable account of the origin of nations. But this language implies that there are in the world’s literature parallel histories, though later and less reliable. But there is no other account. This history has no parallel. It is unique, without a model and without a shadow. It is both ancient and solitary. Moreover, to call it the ancient and solitary history of merely the origin of nations falls far below the facts. It not only cites the sires from whom all peoples have descended, but also tells us by whom, where, why, how, and when the people of one stock and tongue were parted into separate nations and divers tongues, and by whom and in what lifetime came the allotment, of their respective territories. It is therefore the foundation of ethnology, philology, and geography; the root of history, prophecy, and religion.

UNITY OF STOCK AND SPEECH The whole of the tenth chapter, with the first nine verses of the eleventh, should be treated as one section. The tenth chapter cannot be understood without this paragraph of the eleventh chapter. The table of the nations comes first, and then follows the explanation of the division into nations. So that in order of time the nine verses of the eleventh chapter precede nearly all of the tenth chapter. We therefore take as our starting point a clause of the sixth verse of the eleventh chapter: “And Jehovah said, Behold, they are one people, and they have all one language.” Their oneness of speech is expressed by two discriminating words: “And the whole land was of one lip, and one stock of words.” “Stock of words” means the materials of languages. “Lip,” one of the organs of articulation, denotes manner of speaking, or the use of the material. Family ties and common speech hold them together. Hence as they multiplied and began to move out for homes, the trend of the movement was in one direction only. A proverb of our day is, “Westward the march of Empire takes its way.” It was not so in the beginning. The movement was toward the rising, not the setting sun. As the years roll by and the population rapidly increases, this eastward tide of emigration becomes as a mighty river in volume. But all migrations of men fall under some leadership. The most daring, capable and dominant spirit, by sheer force of character and qualities, naturally forges to the front and directs and controls the movement, and as power increases, his ambition soars. He begins to scheme and plan toward selfish ends. Our record names the man. Not without adequate design does the author in giving his tables of nations turn aside to sketch an episode when he comes to a certain man. “Ham begat Cush, and Gush begat Nimrod; and he began to be a mighty one in the earth. He was a mighty hunter before Jehovah: . . . And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar. Out of that land he went forth into Assyria, and builded Nineveh and Calah (the same is the great city).” This descendant of Ham becomes a leader. His name signifies “The Rebel,” or “we shall rebel.” He makes himself a king. The beginning of his kingdom was Babel in the land of Shinar.

This episode of the tenth chapter connects with the migration eastward in the eleventh chapter: “And it came to pass, as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said to one another, Come, let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. And they said, Come, let us build us a city” (Gen 11:2-4 ). In v. II we find that the city was Babel. Here, then, we find the man, the leader. He was a mighty hunter, this mighty man, as later (1Sa 24:11 ; Jer 16:16 ), a hunter of men. The expression, “before the Lord,” evidently means that he pushed his designs of whatever kind in open and brazen defiance of God’s sight and rule.

ATTEMPT AT CENTRALIZATION There now comes into his mind this ambitious scheme, the establishment of a world empire. To accomplish this there must be a center of unity, a city, and to insure stability and to hedge against the natural and disintegrating fear of another deluge there must be a refuge. To induce submission on the part of his following they must be supplied with a motive: “let us make a name.” This brings the situation into similarity with the conditions that preceded and necessitated the deluge as set forth in Gen 6:4 , the days of the giants and the mighty men, men of renown. This inordinate thirst for fame is idolatrv It is the most cruel of the passions. Everything beautiful, good, holy, and true goes down before it. As an illustration consider the ambition attributed to an ancient painter: “Parrhasius, a painter of Athens, among the Olythian captives Philip of Macedonia brought home to sell, bought one very old man. And when he had him at his house put him to death with extreme torture and torment, the better, by his example, to express the pains and passions of his Prometheus whom he was then about to paint.”

On this excerpt N. P. Willis writes his famous poem, “Parrhasius.” According to the poet when the tortured victim asks for pity the painter replies:

I’d rack thee though I knew a thousand lives were perishing in thine

What were ten thousand to a fame like mine

Again, when the dying captive threatens him with the hereafter, the painter mocks him by denial of future existence:

Yet there’s a deathless name!

A spirit that the smouldering vault shall spurn,

And like a steadfast planet mount and burn

And though its crown of flame

Consume my brain to ashes as it shone

By all the fiery stars I I’d bind it on!

Aye though it bid me rifle

My heart’s last fount for its insatiate thirst

Though every life-strung nerve be maddened first

Though it should bid me stifle

The yearning in my throat for my sweet child,

And taunt its mother till my brain went wild

All I would do it all Sooner than die, like a dull worm, to rot

Thrust foully unto earth to be forgot!

Upon which the poet concludes:

How like a mounting devil in the heart

Rules the unreined ambition! Let it once

But play the monarch, and its haughty brow

Glows with beauty that bewilders thought

And unthrones peace forever. Putting on

The very pomp of Lucifer, it turns

The heart to ashes, and with not a spring

Left in the bosom for the spirit’s lip,

We look upon our splendour and forget

The thirst of which we perish!

We are thus prepared to understand the history: “And they said, Come, let us build a city, and a tower whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make a name; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth” (Gen 11:4 ).

All popular movements of this kind are directed by leaders who suggest the watchwords and crystallize the agitation into forms of their own choosing. The sin of the movement was manifold. It meant rebellion against God and ruin to the race. The divine plan was diffusion, and the command was to push out in all directions, not one; to occupy and subdue all the earth. But Nimrod’s plan was to keep the people all together under his leadership to serve his ends. The object is thus expressed: “Lest we be scattered.” To this day tyrants pursue the same plan and put embargoes on outward movements. And to this day God’s providence has thwarted them by bringing about some discovery or attraction that draws out and diffuses population, relieving the congestion at, the crowded centers of life. A very interesting lesson of history is the study of the ways of Providence in sending out migrations of men to colonize the unoccupied parts of the earth. More wonderful and interesting is the way of that Providence in dispersing Christians that they may carry the gospel to all the world. The one thing that made Nimrod’s plan of centralization possible was the one language of the people. The audacity and rebellion of the plan provoked divine inquisition and judgment. To allow its successful execution would defeat every purpose of God concerning world occupation and bring about a corruption of the race equal to that of the antediluvians. A world crisis had arrived. The case called for heroic treatment and instant relief. What was the divine remedy?

CONFUSION OF TONGUES “Come, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. So Jehovah scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off building the city. Therefore was the name of it called Babel; because Jehovah did there confound the language of all the earth; and from thence did Jehovah scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth” (Gen 11:7-9 ).

This is one of the mightiest and most far-reaching miracles of history. It transcends in importance all the plagues of Egypt. Indeed it finds no counterpart until the descent of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Dr. Conant thus quotes from Schelling’s Philosophy of Mythology:

Humanity cannot have left that condition, in which there was no distinction of peoples, but only of races, without a spiritual crisis, which must have been of the deepest significance, must have taken place in the basis of human consciousness itself. . . . For we cannot conceive of different peoples without different languages; and language is something spiritual. If difference of peoples is not something that was not from the first, but is something that has arisen, then must this also hold true of the different languages. . . . Here we fall in with the oldest account of the human race, the Mosaic writings; toward which so many are disinclined, only because they know not what to do with it, can neither understand nor use it. Genesis puts the rise of peoples in connection with the rise of different languages; but in such a way, that the confounding of the language is the cause, the rise of the peoples the effect.

To evade the significance of this miracle the higher critics resort to their usual refuge, the document hypothesis. They magnify the tenth chapter and disparage the first nine verses of the eleventh. The former, an Elohist document, is credible; the latter, a Jehovah document, is incredible. They claim that chapter 10 leaves us to suppose that the nations were distributed upon the face of the earth in obedience to the natural laws which govern colonization and migration, and that the present striking varieties in human languages are wholly the natural result of the dispersion of the nations. The tenth chapter does not leave us to any such suppositions, the episode of Nimrod, the references to Peleg, and the Gen 10:5 ; Gen 10:20 ; Gen 10:31 , summing up respectively the families of Japheth, Ham, and Shem, demand the explanation in the next chapter. When asked to account naturally for these striking and irreconcilable varieties in the few great parent languages, they reply: Philology has as yet nothing very definite to say as to the possibility of reducing to one the larger families of human speech. In fact, their oracle, philology, is not merely dubious it is dumb. Dr. Conant well sums up all that philology can do with this problem:

The diversities in the languages of the earth present a problem which philosophy has in vain laboured to solve. Comparative philology has shown, however, that many different languages are grouped together by common affinities, as branches of the same family, all having the same original language for their common parent. Notwithstanding the great number and diversity of languages, they may all be traced to a very few original parent tongues. The difficulty lies in the essential and irreconcilable diversity between those several parent tongues, not the remotest affinities existing to indicate a common origin, or any historical relation; a problem for which speculative philosophy can find no solution.

They cannot account for it naturally, but deny the supernatural account, passing the matter by with a sneer, “Oh that account is found only in the Jehovah document.” Or if they wish to be a little more respectful, they say, “The fact is that here, as elsewhere, the Jehovist aims not so much at presenting historical information as showing the ethical and religious significance of the leading points in history and the chief changes in man’s condition.” How happens it that they have such an infallible knowledge of the aim of the Jehovist, and how can there be an ethical and religious significance of history, which is not history but falsehood? If the historical element of the first nine verses of the eleventh chapter be eliminated there is nothing of any kind left, out of which to construct ethics or religion. If the aim of the writer is not history, then words are not signs of ideas. It would be far manlier and more consistent to follow the more destructive higher critics and expunge what they call the Jehovistic record as spurious and unworthy, than to weakly hold on to it and discredit it. The following maxims of literary composition have long obtained:

Never introduce a god into the story unless there be an occasion for a god.

When introduced, let his speech and deeds be worthy of a god.

Let the result of his intervention be worthy of a god. Here was a worthy occasion. Race ruin was imminent and unavoidable by human means. Here was speech and deed worthy of divinity, and results too grand and far-reaching and beneficial to admit of human conception or execution. The author of the book follows his own appropriate method in the use of the divine means. When the divine being, invisible and unapproachable and unknowable, is the subject, the name is Elohim. Whenever it is God manifested particularly by interventions of mercy, it is Jehovah and Jehovah God.

CONSEQUENT GROUPINGS INTO NATIONS The first effect of the confusion of tongues is the stopping of the work, from inability to comprehend each other. The consciousness that a supernatural power had intervened would necessarily fill them with dread, lest a greater evil befall them if they persisted in disobedience. Those who could best understand each other would naturally group themselves and form the nucleus of a separate nation. And this grouping also was naturally according to family origin, whether of Shem, Ham, or Japheth, thus accounting for the three great root languages whose barriers philology cannot pass. This harmonized also with

ASSIGNMENT OF THEIR RESPECTIVE TERRITORIES The proof of this divine allotment of territory is abundant in the lesson and elsewhere. In summing up the histories of the sons of Japheth the record says, “Of these were the isles of the nations divided in their lands, every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.” Similarly of Ham: “These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, in their nations.” And of Shem: “These are the sons of Shem, after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, after their nations.” More particular is the testimony in Gen 10:25 : “And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.” This evidence not only establishes the fact of the division of territory, but shows that the event was so extraordinary and impressive as to give a name to a child born at the time, namely, Peleg, i.e., Division. It is not probable that they could agree among themselves as to the partition of territory. This question could be settled only by supreme authority. And to this fact testify the Scriptures. Paul said at Athens, “And he made of one every nation of men to dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their appointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation” (Act 17:26 ). But the author of Genesis in another book puts the matter beyond controversy:

When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, When he separated the children of men, He set the bounds of the peoples According to the number of the children of Israel. Deu 32:8

This allotment of territory, after the confusion of tongues was followed by an irresistible divine impulse that brought about

DISPERSION TO ALLOTTED HOMES

They had said, “Lest we be scattered.” When God acts the record says, “So Jehovah scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off building the city. Therefore was the name of it called Babel; because Jehovah did there confound the language of all the earth; and from thence did Jehovah scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth” (Gen 11:8-9 ). It has been objected that the division of the land which gave rise to the naming of Peleg, came too early to be connected with the dispersion following the confusion of tongues. The objection is ill advised. The division and assignment of territory long preceded the dispersion. The very sin of the attempt at centralization consisted in its deliberate rebellion against this prior division. In the order of our chapter we have considered the division after the confusion of tongues, not because it was then ordained, but because it was then enforced. We are now prepared to take up chapter 10, and consider specially the parts of the earth occupied by the descendants of the several sons of Noah, which, however, is reserved for another chapter.

QUESTIONS 1. What can you Bay of the value of the tenth chapter of Genesis, (1) as literature; (2) as history; (3) as instruction?

2. In order of time, which comes first. Gen 11:1-9 , or the tenth chapter, and why this order?

3. What, then, was the starting point and what held the people together at this time?

4. As they multiplied, what was the trend of their movement and what modern proverb to the contrary?

5. Who became their leader, what was the meaning of his name, what great cities did he build and where?

6. What was the meaning of “a mighty hunter” and “before the Lord”?

7. What was his ambitious scheme, the essentials to its accomplishment and what was its motive?

8. Give an illustration of cruel, unbridled ambition.

9. What was the manifold sin of this movement and the divine remedy for it?

10. What was God’s plan of defeating such movements in modern times?

11. What was the counterpart of this mighty miracle?

12. What is Dr. Conant’s explanation of the rise of the different peoples?

13. How do the critics try to evade the significance of this miracle and what is this expositor’s reply?

14. According to Dr. Conant what has comparative philology shown with respect to the many different languages?

15. What is the position of the more respectful (mediating) critics and this expositor’s reply?

16. What three maxims of literary composition obtain and their application to the matter in hand?

17. What was the first effect of the confusion of tongues and how account for the three great root languages?

18. What is the Scripture proof of the divine allotment?

19. What brought about the dispersion, and how?

20. What objection is sometimes urged with respect to the dispersion, and the reply thereto?

Fuente: B.H. Carroll’s An Interpretation of the English Bible

Gen 11:1 And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

Ver. 1. And the whole earth was of one language. ] Unity without verity, is no better than conspiracy. A legion of devils could accord to get into one man; and, though many, yet they speak and act as one in that possession. That infernal kingdom is not divided against itself. A shame for God’s saints to be at difference. What should sheep do snarling, like dogs, one at another? The children of this world are wiser, a fair deal, in their generation; Heb 3:10 they can combine and comply, as here; though their society be as unsavoury as the slime and filth that is congealed, when many toads and other vermin meet together.

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Gen 11:1-9

1Now the whole earth used the same language and the same words. 2It came about as they journeyed east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar and settled there. 3They said to one another, Come, let us make bricks and burn them thoroughly. And they used brick for stone, and they used tar for mortar. 4They said, Come, let us build for ourselves a city, and a tower whose top will reach into heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name, otherwise we will be scattered abroad over the face of the whole earth. 5The LORD came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built. 6The LORD said, Behold, they are one people, and they all have the same language. And this is what they began to do, and now nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible for them. 7Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another’s speech. 8So the LORD scattered them abroad from there over the face of the whole earth; and they stopped building the city. 9Therefore its name was called Babel, because there the LORD confused the language of the whole earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of the whole earth.

Gen 11:1 the whole earth used the same language It is obvious that Genesis 11 explains the dispersion described in Genesis 10.

This one language, which apparently went back to Eden, was not Hebrew. The oldest written language known to moderns is cuneiform Sumerian, dating from 3,000 B.C. (ABD, vol. 1, p. 1213), and the culture from10,000-8,000 B.C.

Gen 11:2 they journeyed east This seems to imply a movement away from the location of the ark, the mountains of Ararat. The literal phrase journeyed means pulled up stakes (BDB 652, KB 704), Qal INFINITIVE CONSTRUCT). Mesopotamia is southeast of the mountains of Ararat (which run from modern Turkey to Iran).

the land of Shinar This refers to lower Mesopotamia or Babylon, also called Chaldea (BDB 11042).

Gen 11:3 This verse has one Qal IMPERATIVE and two related COHORTATIVE forms. This describes the construction techniques that are historically accurate for Mesopotamia (no trees). There were no rocks in this area, so bricks were fired. King James has slime, but it obviously refers to the black, sticky substance that boils up in this area. We would call it tar, asphalt, or pitch (BDB 330, cf. Gen 6:14).

Gen 11:4 This verse has one Qal IMPERATIVE and two related IMPERFECTS used as COHORTATIVES. There seem to be four elements involved in this account: (1) the building of a city and a tower; (2) the size of which would rival the other structures of its day; (3) they wanted to make themselves a name; and (4) they did not want to be scattered abroad (i.e. all the earth). The exact connotation of this is uncertain. Many have asserted that it relates to the Babylonian ziggurats, but the Hebrew word is migdal which is translated fortified tower (BDB 153, cf. Jdg 8:9-17). It is obviously an attempt by mankind to organize themselves apart from God, and thereby to thwart His will. Philo even says that they wrote their name on every brick so that they would not be dispersed. This is the first example of human pride, organized and functioning apart from God (cf. Daniel and Revelation 18, 19).

a tower whose top will reach into heaven The people of Mesopotamia were astral worshipers (i.e. heavenly lights were gods). These towers were raised platforms to observe the night sky. They were the place where the gods were worshiped and encountered.

Gen 11:5 This is very anthropomorphic (cf. Gen 18:21; Exo 3:8).

Gen 11:7 let Us go down This verse also has a Qal IMPERATIVE with two related COHORTATIVES. This is a PLURAL form, much like Gen 1:26; Gen 3:22. Although this passage seems anthropomorphic in English, it is not referring to a weakness on God’s part but to an act of grace whereby He stops sinful mankind from trying to run their lives in their own fallen way (cf. Romans 1-3).

The Let Us of divine activity thwarts the let us of human rebellion (cf. Gen 11:3-4; Gen 11:7).

Gen 11:9 Babel It is interesting to note that archaeology has unearthed literary documents from the Sumerian culture in Mesopotamia which assert that at this time all people spoke in one tongue (i.e. Samuel Noah Kramer in his article The Babel of Tongues: A Sumerian Version in Journal of the American Oriental Society, 88:108-111). The popular Hebrew etymology is confusion (i.e. balal, BDB 93), which seems to describe God’s confusing their one language. Babel literally means the gate of God (Akkadian bab-ilani), which is very similar to some of the names of Ziggurats, which were large structures with a temple on top to worship the astral deities. Babylon becomes a symbol of a fallen world power, exemplified in Nimrod, later in Nebuchadnezzar, and finally in the sea beast of the book of Revelation.

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

earth = people of the earth. Figure of speech Metonymy (of Subject). App-6; “earth” put for inhabitants.

language. Hebrew “lip”. Figure of speech Metonymy (of cause); lip put for language. The chapter begins with man’s attempt to unify mankind, and ends with God’s new provision to unify all in blessing with Abraham’s seed.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Chapter 11

Now in chapter eleven.

The whole earth was of one language, and one speech ( Gen 11:1 ).

Probably Hebrew because in the earlier record of the book of Genesis, the names of the people were Hebrew names that have Hebrew meanings. And so the original language was perhaps the Hebrew language itself. “The whole earth was of one language, one speech.”

And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said one to another, Let us make brick, and burn them thoroughly ( Gen 11:2-3 ).

Now this is an interesting thing because it shows that very early after the flood, they had brick kilns and rather than just building their houses out of rocks, they were advanced to the state of making bricks and putting them in the kiln, burning them thoroughly. So rather than just adobe kind of buildings, they were now using a mortar with a cured brick or a burned brick and they began to build, of course, the city of Nineveh, the city of Babylon, all began to be built in this period by Nimrod himself.

And so they said, Let us build a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole eaRuth ( Gen 11:4 ).

Now God’s command was to actually fill the earth. It’s an attempt to sort of countermand God’s commandment. “Lest we be scattered abroad throughout all the earth.” Let’s join together. Let’s just, you know, congregate in this area.

And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded ( Gen 11:5 ).

Now again we’re describing the activities of God in human terms as though God were coming down and looking things over. In reality, God is omnipresent. He was watching the thing the whole while.

The LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they all have one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do ( Gen 11:6 ).

The developing of this religious system. Now it is very possible that originally God placed the stars in the heavens for signs and that the Gospel is actually given in the Zodiac, the virgin, the lion. But as Satan has always taken the things of God and twisted them and perverted them, so from the original message that God had placed there in the heavens of His plan for the ages, that there was that perversion of it into what is the modern astrology, which began way back again in the Babylonian era here in Babel where they were going to build this tower as an observatory to observe the constellations and so forth at the sky. But it is quite possible that originally the Gospel was there indeed in the stars as far as the message of God to man.

Now it would seem that the Magi who came from the east to find the Christ child were reading correctly the heavens. “We have seen His star in the east, we’ve come to worship Him”. And that they were reading truly the signs that God had placed there. Now the Bible says that God has placed the stars for signs and for seasons. And it is very possible that originally there was indeed the message of God in the stars but has been perverted, as I say, into the modern astrology. And the perversion began way back there where they began to look at the stars for the influence over their lives, rather than looking to God.

And so God in His Word puts down astrologers, stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, those who sought them to govern their lives by the influence of the stars upon them and so forth. And God really speaks out very heavily against that in the prophecy of Isaiah. But it is an ancient, ancient thing, the horoscopes and all. But as with so many things, it is possible that in the beginning it was pure and had a true message of God, but it has been perverted as time has gone on.

So God seeing this development said

Let us go down, and confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. And so the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off building the city. Therefore its name was called Babel ( Gen 11:7-9 );

Babel, whichever pronunciation you prefer. It really is a word that just sort of it was a word that was adapted because of what the sound sounded like. Just like the word “barbarian” is a word that was developed by the Greeks and the word “barbarian” in Greek literally is barbar. And anybody who didn’t speak Greek was a barbar because your language sounded so funny. So anybody who didn’t speak Greek, they just considered them uncultured, you know; they’re barbar. It just means that they talk some other language rather than the cultured Greek.

And so from that we get the word “barbarian” but it originally was just a, you know, just a sound that they made, unintelligible sound by which they were sort of mimicking any language other than Greek. It’s barbar, oh; he’s a barbar. And so this “Babel” is the same thing. It’s a mimicking of a sound that was not understood. Babel just is somewhat like the barbar. Babel. It’s just “I don’t understand what you’re saying”. What do you mean “ba-ba”? And so the word has come to mean confusion, lack of understanding. And so they called the name of the place Babel.

because the LORD did there confound or confuse the languages of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the eaRuth ( Gen 11:9 ).

And so at this point, the people who were speaking. Of course this was a tremendous miracle indeed, the development of all of these languages. Now the interesting thing about languages is that many times we think of the English language because we grew up with it, you know, it’s such an excellent language in communicating ideas. And we think, you know, people who are living in say, primitive cultures, in stone age cultures surely they must have a primitive form of language. Ours must surely be a highly cultured form of language, the English language. And they must have very primitive language, but it is an interesting thing that many of the primitive cultures have the most complex languages, highly complex languages, much more so than English. And thus, there is great difficulty in translating into many of these languages of primitive people.

You think, oh, it would be easy to translate, you know, “The man went to church.” But some of these primitive cultures have so many words for “man”. So you’d have to know if the man was one that you knew well, or you knew slightly because they have one word for man that you know well, and another one for a man that you know slightly. Then you’d have to know whether you like the man or not. And then you’d have to know whether or not you respected him. And actually they have maybe twenty different words for “man.” So you’d have to know all kinds of things about this man before you know which word would fit the text or the translation.

Now the word “he went,” did he go once in his life? Or did he go occasionally? Was it something that he was accustomed to doing? Or something that was rare for him to do? And so even in the verb you have so many different words that would describe it, that you get into the translation and really you want to throw up your hands and quit because these languages are so many times so much more complex.

I have a friend who was translating the gospel of Mark into the Choco dialect in Panama and he came to the place where he was working with his translating helper, and he came to the place where Jesus spit in the ground and made mud and put it in the blind man’s eyes and told him to go to the pool of Siloam and wash it out. So in translating this word “spit” the native said, But how did he spit? You know there’s many different ways to spit. Well, we only have one English word but the Choco Indian has so many different words.

You have a different way of spitting and of course how do you know which word it is? We don’t know what word it is. And because you know they have so many different words he said, “Well”, he said, “did he hock and spit? Or did he pick up-did he pick up the dirt in his hand and just spit and mix it up? Or did he spit on the ground and mix it up? Or did he put the dirt in his eye and spit in his eye and mix it up?” And he would have a different word for each action. Oh, we don’t know what Jesus did, but this development of language.

Now it is interesting that man has in any and every culture, no matter how primitive, highly complex method of communicating of ideas, and I don’t care how primitive or ignorant that particular culture may be. Their languages are highly developed in the ability to communicate their ideas, whether they do it through grunts, through a singsong, or whatever. They are able to communicate their ideas no matter how primitive their culture.

This certainly is something that separates man from the animal kingdom. There is nothing in the animal kingdom that even approximates a complex form of communication of ideas. But yet in the most primitive culture of man, and in every culture of man, there is a language communication. So this was the beginning of the separation of languages.

Now after the separation into the basic language groups, there of course have become modifications even within the same language or generalized language. We find the romance languages and similarities between the Spanish and the Portuguese and the Italian and the French. We find that there is certain similarity between the German and the Scandinavian. We find that English is a language that has borrowed much from Latin and from Greek.

So there have been developed languages from the basic language system, but God divided their languages. And instantly they no doubt got together in groups that they could communicate to, family groups and so forth where they could communicate to each other, but it caused the division and the separation. And that spreading out then into the world and scattering abroad upon the face of the earth as is described.

Now we’re going to zero in down to Abraham because that’s where our story must move.

So these are the generations of Shem ( Gen 11:10 ):

Getting now again a repetition of the generations of Seth, Shem, but moving definitely just down towards Abraham.

He was a hundred years old, and he begat Arphaxad two years after the flood: he lived after he begat Arphaxad five hundred years, and he begat sons and daughters ( Gen 11:10-11 ).

So he lived to be about six hundred years old approximately.

Arphaxad lived five, thirty-five years, and begat Salah ( Gen 11:12 ):

And we get, he begat Eber and we follow down to Abraham, and actually that’s the one where we’re coming to, so let’s go on to verse twenty-six.

Terah lived seventy years, and he begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran ( Gen 11:26 ).

Now whether or not this is the order in which they were born, we do not know. Whether or not you know how old was Terah when Abraham was born, we don’t know. Maybe he was the third son. We have no way of knowing but he lived seventy years and he had these three sons, Abram, Nahor and Haran. Now he lived after that for many years also.

Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran; and Haran begat Lot. And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity, in Ur of the Chaldees. And Abram and Nahor took them wives ( Gen 11:27-29 ):

So their brother Haran died early having married and born one son, Lot. Actually he bore some daughters, too. And they took wives and

the name of Abram’s wife was Sarai; and the name of Nahor’s wife was Milcah, for she was also the daughter of Haran ( Gen 11:29 ),

So he married his niece.

the father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah. But Sarai was barren; and she had no child. And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran ( Gen 11:29-31 )

So with Haran dead, Lot being his son, Abraham sort of adopted Lot because Abraham did not have any sons of his own. So he sort of adopted Lot and Lot became a journeyer with Abraham.

But they altogether went from the Ur of the Chaldees ( Gen 11:31 ),

Now it was in the Ur of the Chaldees, in this area where this false religious systems, the Pantheism and Polytheism and all began to develop and the perverted religious systems, and so they left the Ur of the Chaldees.

to go to the land of Canaan; and they came to Haran, and dwelt there ( Gen 11:31 ).

Now the fact that they all left to go to Canaan means that in the beginning, it could be that Abraham’s father also received the call of God to leave and get out of this area that had begun to become religiously polluted and to come into a whole new area. But Terah, they came as far as Haran and there they dwelt.

And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah died in Haran ( Gen 11:32 ).

Now there is a seeming contradiction of scripture here when you get in the New Testament and Stephen is talking about Abraham being called of God to leave the Ur of the Chaldees and to go to Israel, how that after he said Terah died, Abraham then went on to Canaan. But when you start putting the ages together, you find that Abraham actually left, if Terah lived to be two hundred and five years old, then he was seven years old when Abraham was born then, and Abraham was seventy-five when he left. The seventy-five and the seventy makes a hundred and forty-five years, and yet he lived to be two hundred and five years old. So you have a discrepancy in mathematics here. So what is the solution or what is the answer?

There are a couple possible suggestions. Number one, Abraham may not have been the firstborn son. They may not be listed in the order of their births but in the order of precedence of their son, and Abraham could have been born many years after. In other words, seventy years and maybe Haran was born when he was seventy years old. And it doesn’t give his age at the time of Abraham’s birth. That’s one possibility. So that Abraham was sort of a late child and that indeed by the time he was seventy-five his father was two hundred and five years old, very possible.

Another possibility is that Stephen is talking in sort of a spiritual sense that he died. You remember one day a young fellow came to Jesus and said, “I’ll follow you but allow me first to go bury my father”. And Jesus said, “Let the dead bury the dead. Come and follow Me” ( Mat 8:21-22 ). Now the “let me first bury my father” was a common term. It didn’t mean that his father was dead. It isn’t that Jesus is showing a disrespect for a father who had died, but it is a term whereby a person was saying “I don’t want to do it now. I want to wait until my father dies”. It’s just a term of procrastination or putting something off until later. I want to do it later. Wait till my father dies. Your father can be alive and healthy. He may be good for another fifty, sixty years. But it was a term of procrastination, a common term of procrastination.

Now knowing the use of Jesus in this term in the ideas that were given by it, it could be that Stephen is using it in the same sense and that Terah, when they came to Haran, died spiritually because Terah began to actually apostatize and became also a worshipper of false gods. So it could be that he’s referring to the spiritual death of Terah when he turned to spiritual apostasy. And it was at that point, when Terah spiritually was dead unto God, that Abraham realized he had to make his journey alone. And he took off with his -with Lot and the servants and so forth, and his wife Sarah. And they began then to journey onto the land that God had promised to show him.

Actually going from the area of the Ur of the Chaldees going to Haran, they were going about six hundred miles northwest. It was about four hundred miles from Haran, down to the land of Canaan to the area of Shechem where he was ultimately to end up. But Abraham started off journeying in obedience to God from the Ur of the Chaldees. They stopped with his father. It could be that his dad said “hey, this is good. Let’s settle here. Let’s settle in this area. It’s nice, you know, it’s productive and all”.

Let’s settle here and there was a spiritual death of Terah to the call of God and awareness of God or the spiritual death. And Stephen could be referring to that when Terah died, then that spiritual death, Abraham realized that he had to leave now his father and that family and journey on by himself to the land that God had promised to show him.

So don’t cast off your faith because of a bit of mathematics here. There are possible explanations for and which one is correct, of course, we don’t know.

Chapter 12

Now the LORD had said unto Abram, Get thee out of thy country, and from thy family ( Gen 12:1 ),

So Abraham really wasn’t totally obedient at this point. And this to me is interesting, because Abraham is always held as the model of faith in the New Testament, the model of a man who believed and trusted God. He’s the prime example of the man who believes. And so many times when we read about faith and the exploits of faith, we think, “But I’m so weak and I’ve blown it so many times, surely I can’t do it”. It’s good to know that Abraham wasn’t perfect nor was his faith perfect. It’s good to know that you don’t have to be perfect and your faith doesn’t have to be perfect for God to honor you.

So God said, “Get away from your family”. He took his dad with him from the Ur of the Chaldees to Haran. That was an incomplete obedience. Stopping at Haran was incomplete obedience to God. So even men noted as men of faith have their moments. And just because you slipped back and have your moments doesn’t mean that God won’t honor you and honor your faith, or that God doesn’t love you and wants to still work in a powerful way in your life, just because you blow it and you stop at Haran. It doesn’t mean that the call of God is going to be removed and there’s no chance for you to go on and fulfill that which God has laid upon your life and your heart to do.

Many people have stopped at Haran, but the time came for him to move on, which he did. Maybe the time has come for you to move on from your Haran. “The Lord said, Get thee out of thy country, from thy father’s family.”

from your father’s house, to a land that I will show you ( Gen 12:1 ):

So by the very virtue of the fact that Terah went with him, it could be the old man was saying, “Oh no, don’t leave. I want to go with you, son”. Or it could be Abraham was saying, “Okay, dad, all right”, you know. And he could have been weak in this area. But then his dad began to drag him down and slow him down, until his father died spiritually following after the pagan practices, and Abraham moved on.

I will make of thee [God said] a great nation ( Gen 12:2 ),

Now God is establishing covenant with Abraham. “Get away from your family, your father’s house, to a land that I will show you. I’ll make you a great nation”.

I will bless you, I will make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing ( Gen 12:2 ):

All of these promises God fulfilled to Abraham. He made of him a great nation. God has blessed him and made the name of Abraham great. It’s honored and respected. “And thou shalt be a blessing.”

And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse them that curse thee: and in thee shall all the families of the earth be blessed ( Gen 12:3 ).

And from that is the promise that the Messiah would come from Abraham. “In thee all the families of the earth.” Not just the Jews but all the families of the earth will be blessed from Abraham’s progeny, even Jesus Christ.

So Abram departed, as the LORD had spoken unto him; and Lot went with him: and Abram was seventy-five years old when he departed out of Haran. And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and the souls that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go to the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came ( Gen 12:4-5 ).

Four hundred-mile journey, which in those days, with all of the animals and everything else, must have taken quite a long time indeed.

And Abram passed through the land unto the place of Shechem, unto the plain of Moreh. And the Canaanites [or the descendants or Canaan] were then in the land. And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there he built an altar unto the LORD, who appeared unto him ( Gen 12:6-7 ).

Now the promise of giving the land to Abraham’s seed at this point would also include the Palestinians, because the Arabs also were descendants of Abraham through Ishmael. So at this point, the land is promised not just to the Jews but also to thy seed, which would include the Arabs, Palestinians. But later on, when God repeats it to Jacob, it excludes the Arabs.

And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and he pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai [or Ai] on the east ( Gen 12:8 ):

Now when Joshua came in later to conquer the land, he came up from Jericho and conquered Ai and then onto Bethel. Abraham now has a favorite spot there near Bethel in between Bethel and Ai. It’s the highest part of the land in that particular area. It gives you just a fabulous view. It’s about ten miles north of Jerusalem and about twenty miles or so from Shechem. But from there you can see down into the Jordan valley, you can see up towards the area of Samaria, you can see Jerusalem and the area south. You can look over towards the Mediterranean. It just is a beautiful vantage-point in that mountainous area between Bethel and Ai. And when Abraham came to this area, he built an altar. “And the LORD appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed I give this land.”

he built an altar unto the LORD, and called on the name of the LORD. And Abram journeyed, going on down now to the south. And there was a famine in the land: so Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there; for the famine was grievous in the land ( Gen 12:8-10 ).

So there was a drought in the-of course, he went on south towards Beersheba. There is always a drought down there. The place is really dry. It’s ‘deserty’.

And it came to pass, when he was come near to Egypt, that he said to Sarai his wife ( Gen 12:11 ),

Now here’s our great man of faith, our example.

Behold now, I know that you are a beautiful woman to look upon ( Gen 12:11 ):

Hey, that’s saying a lot to your wife when she’s sixty-five years old. But because of the longevity, at sixty-five you were still really, you know, in your prime of youth in a sense of beauty. Abraham lived to be over one hundred and sixty. So at sixty-five you’re really not that old yet in those times. But it does, you know, when you think of sixty-five years old and talking about her great beauty, it does sound to be very interesting. “I know that you are a beautiful woman to look upon.”

Therefore when it comes to pass, when the Egyptians will see you, they will say, This is his wife: and they will kill me, and keep you alive ( Gen 12:12 ).

They’ll take you into their harem. Now this was a common practice among the Egyptian kings is to just, if a man, if he saw a beautiful woman, he’d kill her husband and take her as his wife. And so he said,

I pray that you’ll tell them that you are my sister: that it might be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee ( Gen 12:13 ).

Hey, this is our great man of faith, Abraham. You see, even great men of faith have their weaknesses and their moments. Now that encourages me for some silly reason because I also have my moments of weaknesses. But I have the concept that when I get weak, God just says, “All right, that’s it. You had your chance”. You know, wipe out, but not so. God continued to honor Abraham. God continued to bless Abraham. He wasn’t perfect.

God doesn’t use perfect people because they don’t exist. So don’t worry that you’re not perfect. Don’t think that God is going to reject you because you’re not perfect. Don’t think that God can’t use you because you’re not perfect. God blessed Abraham. God used Abraham though he had his lapses of faith, just like we have our lapses of faith.

So it came to pass, that, when Abram was come to Egypt, the Egyptians beheld the woman that she was very beautiful. And the princes also of Pharaoh saw her, and they commended her before the Pharaoh: and the woman was taken into the Pharaoh’s house. And he entreated Abram [or he treated Abraham] well for her sake: and he had sheep, and oxen, and asses, and menservants, maidservants, she asses, camels. And the LORD plagued Pharaoh and his house with great plagues because of Sarai Abram’s wife. And the Pharaoh called Abram, and said, What have you done to me? Why didn’t you tell me that she was your wife? Why did you say, She is my sister? I might have taken her to be my wife: now behold your wife, take her, go your way. And Pharaoh commanded his men concerning him: and they sent him away, and his wife, and all that he had ( Gen 12:14-20 ).

So he came under then a special protective edict of the Pharaoh so that he would not fall prey to the men in order that they might take Sarai his wife.

So an introduction now to Abraham. We’re beginning now to follow and we will from now on follow Abraham as we come on down towards Christ, as the Bible now is the developing of the nation and from the nation the coming forth of the Savior of the world.

So next week we’ll continue on beginning with chapter thirteen. Shall we stand? God bless you and enrich your heart and your mind in the things of the Spirit, giving you understanding of His Word. And may God increase your faith and your knowledge and understanding of Him. God go with you and bless you and watch over you and keep you in all your ways, strengthening you and ministering to you through His love. In Jesus’ name. “

Fuente: Through the Bible Commentary

In this chapter we have the account of a human movement against dispersion. The movement was one of rebellion and was frustrated by divine interposition. The divine intention was the covering of the whole earth. The human action was in opposition to that, as men said, “Lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.”

This rebellious purpose was frustrated by the confusion of tongues. Necessarily belief in this story demands belief in the possibility of God’s direct intervention in the affairs of men by what we sometimes speak of as supernatural methods. Any argument which is valid against the story of the confusion of tongues at Babel is equally valid against the account of the gift of tongues at Pentecost.

In this chapter we find the history narrowed. The lines of development through Ham and Japheth are omitted and the generations of Shem are given. This marks the selection of that branch of the race from which a man is to be chosen, out of whose loins a new nation is to spring, from which the great Deliverer will come.

In the last section of the chapter we have an account of the movement toward the adoption of a simple faith as the one law of life. Terah moved from Ur of the Chaldees. It is not stated that this was in response to a faith. The fact, however, that it was in the direction of the divine intention would suggest that it was so. Carefully observe these words, however, “And Terah . . . went forth . . . to go into the land of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.” It is the record of a start in a right direction which lacked persistence. Terah paused half way and dwelt at Haran until he died. The true man of faith is seen acting so far under the influence of his father; and bound by the earthly tie he abode with him in Haran.

Fuente: An Exposition on the Whole Bible

the Confusion of Tongues

Gen 11:1-9

Driven by the fear of another deluge, though God had given distinct assurances to the contrary, and impelled by the desire to perpetuate their name and memory to coming generations, Noahs descendants began to build on the plain of Shinar-a fertile valley watered by the Euphrates and Tigris. Babel, Babylon and Babylon the Great, such is the lineage of the apostasy which has ever opposed the Church of God; like a shadow, stealing along the wall at our side. To Babel we must oppose Abraham; to Babylon, Jerusalem; to Babylon the Great, the Bride, the Lambs wife. Come out of her, my people, is the cry that rings down the ages. God comes down to see! From him no secrets are hid. All things are naked and open to His eyes. The one language or lip refers to the pronunciation; speech to the stock of words; God touched the lips. When disunion prevails, destruction follows. But Pentecost and Heaven will undo the wreck of Babel. See Rev 7:9.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

Gen 11:1

The New Testament is always converting into blessings the curses of the Old Testament. The burdens and severities of the Law are not only the types but the very substances of Gospel liberty and truth; the confusion of Babel leads to a greater harmony, and its dispersion ends in a more perfect union.

I. After the flood the whole earth was of one language and one speech. Now not even one country has one language within itself. No two persons that ever meet have it. The words may have the same spelling, but they do not carry to the hearer exactly the same sense in which they were spoken. There is not on this earth, in any fraction of it, one language and one speech; hence a great part of our sin and misery.

II. Even if there were a language perfectly the same, yet, until there was a setting to rights of disorders which have come into human thought, and until minds were themselves set in one accord, there could not be unity.

III. The men of the old world determined to do two things which real unity never does. They resolved to make a great monument to their own glory, and they thought to frustrate a law of God and to break a positive rule of our being. Their unity was a false unity. They sought their own praise, and it ran contrary to the mind of God. Their profane unity was dashed into hundreds of divergent atoms, and was carried by the four winds to the four corners of the earth.

IV. What were the consequences of this scattering of the race? (1) It carried the knowledge of the true God and of the one faith into all the lands whither they went; (2) God replenished the whole surface of the globe by spreading men over it; (3) it was a plea for prayer, an argument for hope, a pledge of promise.

V. From that moment God has steadily carried on His design of restoring unity to the earth: His choosing of Abraham, His sending of Christ, the coming of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, were all means to this very end.

J. Vaughan, Fifty Sermons, 10th series, p. 103.

Gen 11:1-9.

From the text we gather these practical suggestions:-

I. Examine carefully the quality and meaning of every new plan of life.

II. Beware of the sophism that Heaven helps those who help themselves.

III. Regulate ambition by the Divine will.

IV. If we make great plans, let us make them in God’s name and carry them out in God’s strength.

V. Let us learn what is meant by all the unfinished towers that we see around us.

VI. Co-operation with God will alone secure the entire realisation of our plans.

Application: (1) We all have plans; (2) examine them; (3) remember the only foundation, on which alone men can build with safety.

Parker, Pulpit Analyst, vol. ii., p. 181.

References: Gen 11:1-9.-Expository 2nd series, vol. i., p. 232; Parker, vol. i., p. 176. Gen 11:1-10.-Clergyman’s Magazine, vol. iv., p. 270.

Gen 11:4

(with Act 2:3-4)

I. Three motives may have led to the building of the Tower of Babel: (1) a feeling that in union and communion lay the secret of man’s renown and strength-that to disperse the family was to debilitate it; (2) a remembrance of the deluge, and a guilty dread of some similar judgment, leading them to draw close to each other for support; (3) man was awaking to self-consciousness and a knowledge of his own resources. He was gaining a glimpse into the possible progress of civilisation. The tower was to be a focus where the rays of his power would be concentrated.

II. To all philanthropists this narrative preaches this simple and sublime truth-that genuine unity is not to be effectually compassed in any other manner than by striking at the original root of discord. Every scheme for the promotion of brotherhood which deals only with the external symptoms of disunion, and aims at correcting only what appears on the surface of society, is ultimately sure of frustration.

III. In His own good time and manner God realised the presumptuous design of the Babel-builders, and united in one central institution the scattered families of man. In the mediation of His Son He has reared up a Tower whose top reaches to heaven. It was in order to gather the nations into this world-embracing community that the apostles of Christ went forth charged with a message of peace and love. When the Spirit descended at Pentecost the physical impediment obstructing union-that difference of language which the sin of Babel had introduced-was removed. The apostles spake with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

E. M. GOULBURN, Occasional Sermons, p. 361.

References: Gen 11:4-9.-C. A. Fowler, Parochial Sermons, p. 137; J. Cumming, Church before the Flood, p. 499; S. Leathes, Studies in Genesis, p. 81.

Gen 11:9

I. God is not the Author of confusion, but of peace. Yet once, in His wise compassion, He made confusion in order to prevent it; He destroyed peace, that in the end he might restore it.

The history of Babel is far more than a record of the defeated attempt of wicked men to accomplish an impossible folly. The building of that tower was the first great act of presumptuous rebellion against God subsequent to the flood, and therefore it was meet that a measure of vengeance should fall upon it such as, while the world stood, should never perish from the memory of mankind. And, as God so often orders, the crime of these men became their punishment. “Let us make a name,” they cried, “lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth.” And this very thing it was which caused them to be scattered.

II. God, who hath made of one blood all nations of men, did, by that exercise of His power, the best thing that could be done to check and retard the rapid growth of evil, and to prepare the means by which man might be brought back to obedience. While there was but one tongue, men easily corrupted each other; when there were many, evil communications were greatly hindered. God marred the Babel-builders’ work, but it was in order to mar their wickedness; and meanwhile He had His own gracious designs for a remedy. It was on the day of Pentecost that that remedy was first applied. Those cloven tongues of fire which, on that day, rested on the heads of the apostles, undid, to as great an extent as will be permitted in this world, the confusion of Babel.

F. E. Paget, Village Sermons (Advent to Whit-Sunday), p. 223.

References: Gen 11:9.-D. J. Vaughan, The Days of the Son of Man, p. 280; G. Huntington, Sermons for the Church’s Seasons (Advent to Trinity), p. 276. Gen 11:27.-R. S. Candlish, Book of Genesis, vol. i., p. 181. Gen 11:27-32.-Expositor, 2nd series, vol. i., p. 281. 11:27-25:10.-J. Monro Gibson, The Ages before Moses, p. 159. Gen 11:32.-H. Grey, A Parting Memorial, p. 232.

Fuente: The Sermon Bible

CHAPTER 11:1-9 The Tower of Babel and the Scattering of the Nations

1. The unity of the nations in Shinar (Gen 11:1-2)

2. Their attempt: Let us make (Gen 11:3-4)

3. The divine answer: Let us go down (Gen 11:5-7)

4. The Result (Gen 11:8-9)

All the earth had one language. This is also proven by philological research. The whole human family journeyed together. They left the mountainous regions and went down to the plain. This expresses their descent morally; they turned away from God, though they had the knowledge of God (Rom 1:18-19).

Notice the absence of the name of God in the beginning of the chapter. They had excluded Him. They said … let us make … and they had … let us build ourselves … let us make ourselves a name. It is self-exaltation and defiance of God. It was full rebellion against God.

The tower they attempted to build was to reach into heaven. It is the first concentrated effort of man against God his maker and against Jehovah. It represents a God-defying and man-deifying confederacy. We cannot follow Babylon in its different aspects. There was the ancient city, the enemy of Jerusalem. There is the present day Babylon, a lifeless, professing Christendom, both Romanism and Protestantism. There is the future Babylon (Rev. 17-18). Concentration and confusion marks Babylon. Compare the Let us here with the prophetic second Psalm, when in the future, nations will confederate against God and His anointed. God came down in divine irony to look at their city and tower and to scatter them by the confusion of languages. And when the rebellion of the second Psalm is reached, He will laugh and hold them in derision.

VI. THE GENERATIONS OF SHEM

CHAPTER 11:10-26 From Shem to TERAH

Here again we find ten names prominent. The same number we have in Genesis 5. Both genealogies in chapters 5 and 11 end with a man to whom God reveals Himself and with each a new dispensation begins, Noah and Abram. Notice the decreasing years of life. Shem was 600 years old, the grandfather of Abram only 148. The line of Shem was degenerating; some of the names indicate this. Terah (delay), the father of Abram, was an idolator. The descendants of Shem worshipped idols (Jos 24:2). When the line of Shem had failed God called Abram.

VII. THE GENERATIONS OF TERAH

CHAPTER 11:27-32 Terahs Family and His Death

Terah with the persons mentioned in Gen 11:31 went forth from Ur to go into the land of Canaan. Terah died in Haran. Gen 12:1 and Act 7:1-4 makes it clear that this going forth was by divine revelation.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Chapter 15

Babel The Religion of the Cursed

And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there. And they said one to another, Go to, let us make brick, and burn them throughly. And they had brick for stone, and slime had they for mortar. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top [may reach] unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the LORD said, Behold, the people [is] one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth: and they left off to build the city. Therefore is the name of it called Babel; because the LORD did there confound the language of all the earth: and from thence did the LORD scatter them abroad upon the face of all the earth.

Gen 11:1-9

In this age of superstition and spiritual ignorance, it is fairly easy to convince educated fools that when we die we float around in the air looking for a new body to inhabit and come back in some animal form, or as another person. It is not difficult to persuade well read, well educated people that there are highly intelligent little green men from Mars or Pluto flying in and out of the earths atmosphere in UFOs looking for friendly faces with whom to communicate.

Yet, it is next to impossible to persuade men of the most self-evident, undeniable facts revealed in Scripture. Among the many things which men choose not to believe because they wish not to believe is the fact that Satan is real, that his influence is real, and that his most cunning, powerful, deceptive influence has always been religious deception. This is a fact men and women ignore to the peril of their souls and to the peril of the souls under their influence.

Our Adversary

Satan is today what he has been throughout the history of this world, our adversary. He is the avowed enemy of God, the enemy of Christ, the enemy of the gospel, and the enemy of our souls. In his pride, the fiend of hell longs for the place of God. He longs to sit upon the throne of total sovereignty. Because God has from eternity given that place to his Son and to chosen sinners in his Son (Heb 2:6-9), Apollyon has been bent upon the destruction of Christ and his people from the beginning. The red dragon of hell is determined to destroy Christ and the woman of his choice, his bride, the church (Gen 3:15).

No other explanation can be given for the serpents attack upon Adam and Eve in the garden, except the serpents hatred of God and his people. Satans rage was displayed in Cains murder of his brother, Abel. Cain murdered his brother for only one reason. Abel confessed that the only way a sinner could approach God is by the blood and righteousness of the Lamb of God, the Lord Jesus Christ. Abel was the first disciple of Christ persecuted and murdered for righteousness (the righteousness of Christ) sake (Mat 5:11-12). It was Satans hellish influence that swelled Hams heart with pride and hypocrisy, causing him to despise his father Noah and gleefully expose his fathers sin.

Satans master plan by which he seeks to dominate the world, by which he strives to destroy the souls of men, by which he toils night and day to do what he knows he cannot do (topple the throne of the Almighty and destroy the people of his love), is deception, hellish religious deception.

Satan is the master of deception. The prince of darkness is the great imitator. It is not now and never has been his aim to destroy the souls of men by drugs, alcohol, pornography, adultery, fornication, abortion and murder. By these things men and women destroy their lives and the lives of others. However, as horrible as such vices are, Satans devices are far more crafty. He seeks to destroy the souls of men by religion and righteousness.

He cannot destroy the Christ of God. So he raises up false christs, antichrists. He cannot keep sinners from Christ by making them ever so wicked. So he transforms himself into an angel of light and sends preachers from hell to teach sinners how to make themselves righteous (2Co 11:13-15). He cannot destroy the church and kingdom of God, the woman of Christs choice, his virgin bride (made holy, unblameable, and unreproveable by his grace and righteousness). So the destroyer has, from the beginning, raised up and maintained a religion to rival the worship of God, a woman to rival and seek to destroy the church of God.

Babylon, the Great Harlot

This rival religion, this rival woman, by whom the prince of darkness rules over the minds of men and women throughout the world is referred to throughout the Scriptures as Babylon, the great whore, the mother of all harlot religion (Pro 7:1-27; Revelation 16-18). The wine of this old, old whores fornication, by which she keeps the heads and hearts of men in the spin of a drunken stupor is self-righteous, freewill, works religion. We are warned and commanded of God to come out of and have nothing to do with the blasphemous, soul-damning charms of Arminian, freewill, works religion (Pro 6:23-26; Isa 48:20; Isa 57:11; Jer 50:8; Jer 51:6; Jer 51:45; 2Co 6:14 to 2Co 7:1; Rev 18:4).

The religion of Babylon, Arminian, freewill, works religion, is the religion of the damned. The religion of this world began as an organized religious system way back in Genesis 10, 11, during the days of Nimrod and the building of the tower of Babel.

Nimrod, the Mighty Rebel

The story of Nimrod and the great tower of Babel was very prominent in medieval folklore. Regretfully, most of what people think about Nimrod, Babel, and the great tower of Babel arise, not from the account given by divine inspiration, but from medieval folklore. The myths and legends of dark ages still linger. We are told by many, based only on these myths and legends, that the walls of Babel were nine miles high.

Men and women commonly pass over the account given in Scripture with little notice and learn nothing from it, simply because they mistakenly picture a huge tower reaching upward toward heaven, so high that men hoped to walk into heaven by climbing a brick tower. How easily Satan blinds us to the warnings and teachings of Holy Scripture. The city of Babel (Babylon) was built by cursed Hams grandson, Nimrod, in rebellion against God, as a fortress to protect unbelieving rebels from the wrath and judgment of God. The religion of Babel is the religion of the cursed, the damned, the reprobate.

The man who built this city was Nimrod, a mighty rebel against God (Gen 10:8-10). The name Nimrod means rebel, and a rebel this man was. He was the cursed son of a cursed son. Nimrod knew the curse of God upon Ham and Canaan. He knew the reason for the curse. He knew what Ham had done to Noah. Yet, being the proud rebel he was, Nimrod dared sit himself up as the judge of Gods judgment. He was a hunter, but not just a hunter of game. This man was a bloodthirsty man. He wanted all men to be put in subjection to him; and he was determined to make it happen, no matter who he had to kill or how many. God said, The sons of Ham will serve Japheth and Shem. Nimrod said, Well see about that. He began to be a mighty one in the earth, and took possession of the land of Shinar and all the peoples of the East.

When we read in Gen 11:9 that he was a mighty hunter before the Lord, the word before would be better translated against. The beginning of this God hating rebels empire was Babel. It had been at least 300 years since the flood. The terror of Gods judgment was forgotten. The people were of one language, doing great, impressive things. Nimrod made himself powerful. The words and counsel of Eber were ignored. The gospel he learned from his grandfather Noah through his godly father Shem, was held in contempt. The worship of God was trampled under foot. The sheer power of Nimrods wealth, influence, following, and terror caused the whole world, except for Gods chosen remnant to follow him and unite with him, in the name of God, fighting against God and his people.

The Tower of Babel

The city of Babel, which Nimrod built, was more than a place of government. Babel was a religious refuge. Today, we associate the word Babel with confusion. That is what the name has come to mean because God turned the place into confusion. However, the word Babel originally meant something far different. Nimrod named the city Babel because Babel meant the gate of God. Nimrod was, in the name of worshipping God, like Cain of old, determined to worship God only on his own terms (Gen 11:1-4). In other words, he was in reality worshipping himself and calling it the worship of God. This is what the Holy Spirit calls will worship in Col 2:23. Babel was a refuge of lies, but a refuge in which men tried to secure themselves from the wrath of God and convinced themselves that they had done so.

Babel, like all false religion, was built by a confederacy of rebels. — They said one to another Honest, faithful, believing men do not try to gain the approval or amass the strength of others in worshipping God. They just worship God, obeying his will and his word. Rebels need the reinforcement of other rebels. They never dare to stand alone with God and for the glory of God against the flood of human opinion.

Babel, like all false religion, was a religious refuge built according to mans wisdom. The followers of Nimrod discovered a new way of doing things. They made bricks and mixed mortar (the bricks of their self-righteous works, held together by the serpent-slime of their free will) to build a church house and a city with man-made material, for the honor of man, and called it the gate of God. It was the most splendid city and the most gorgeous temple the world had ever seen; but God held it in utter contempt; and so did those men and women who worshipped him.

Like all false religion, the city and tower of Babel were built by men, for men, to protect them from the judgment of God. That is the meaning of Gen 11:4. Go to, LET US BUILD US A CITY AND A TOWER, whose TOP MAY REACH UNTO HEAVEN LEST WE BE SCATTERED ABROAD upon the face of the whole earth.

Obviously, the sons of Ham understood that the curse God placed upon them meant the dispersion of their race through all the earth, the destruction of their family. They said, No sir. We will stay right here and protect ourselves from Gods judgment, by building a house and religion which God himself will have to approve of, by which the whole world will know our names forever. When the Scriptures speak of this tower reaching to heaven no more is implied than a very high, massive wall (Deu 1:28; Deu 9:1), a fortress.

It matters not what a persons refuge is, if it is not Christ and him crucified, it is a refuge of lies and will be swept away in the day of Gods wrath (Isa 28:14-21).

The religion of Babel was exactly the same as the religion of this perverse generation, the religion of the curse. False religion has always been Gods curse upon men and women who refuse to worship him. All false religion is man centered, flesh pleasing, freewill, works religion, religion by which man attempts to make himself acceptable to God (2Th 2:11-12). This was the mark of Cain. This is the mark of the beast. This is the religion of our age.

In ancient Babylon, in the days of Nimrod, in defiance to the God of Noah, men said, “Let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven, and let us make us a name.” That is the creed of all false religion. The religion of Babylon is any religion which centers in man, depends upon man, and gives man a name of honor. It matters not what name the religion wears, any religion that makes salvation dependent upon something man does, rather than what Christ has done, is the religion of Babylon. Any religion that makes salvation to be determined by the will of man, rather than the will of God, is the religion of Babylon. Let me be unmistakably clear.

Election

No one can deny that the Bible teaches the doctrine of election; but most say that election is determined by God responding to what he “foresaw” man would do. Others say, “God chose to save whosoever will, and if a man wills to be saved he makes himself one of the elect.” In either case, election is dependent on the will of man. That is Babylonian doctrine. The Word of God declares that election is by God’s sovereign will alone (Eph 1:3-6; 2Ti 1:9).

Redemption

All religions, which claim to be Christian, profess to believe in redemption by the blood of Christ. Most declare that the blood of Christ was shed to redeem those who perish as well as those who are saved. Such doctrine means that Christ shed his blood in vain for those who perish in hell. Such doctrine declares that it is man who makes the blood of Christ effectual for redemption by the power of his free-will. That is Babylonian heresy. The Word of God declares that Christ has effectually accomplished the redemption of his people (Gal 3:13; Heb 9:12).

Regeneration

Regeneration, the new birth , is declared to be the result of man’s choice only by those whose religion is Babylonian. The Word of God plainly declares that man’s will has nothing to do with the accomplishment of the new birth. It is the work of God’s will and power alone (Joh 1:12-13; Rom 9:16).

The Cause of Judgment

The cause of divine judgment was then as it is now and ever shall be, the willful rejection of divine revelation (Gen. 115-9) The words at the end of Gen 11:6, (now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do), are not a suggestion that God was fearful these men might actually get to heaven by their inventions. These words are a declaration of the basis of divine judgment. Nimrod and the sons of Ham would not, by any means, be turned away from their delusion.

Look what happened when the Lord God came down to Babel, to visit them with his wrath and vex them with his sore displeasure. He confounded their language so that they could not understand one another. He sealed them up in confusion and reprobation. God fixed it so that those who would not believe could not believe (Pro 1:23-33). The sons of Ham could no longer understand the speech of Shems sons. The sons of God speak a language the world cannot understand. The Lord God scattered the rebels. He scattered them from place to place over the earth. He scattered them in enmity against one another. He scattered them through all the earth, so that they might serve his purpose of grace toward his elect in all places.

The Purpose of God

Nothing and no one shall ever overturn Gods purpose, destroy his church, or even slightly hinder his purpose. As Satan and the demons of hell are Gods unwilling and unwitting vassals, so too, the sons of Ham can do nothing but serve Gods elect, exactly according to Gods purpose (Gen 9:25).

The confusion of divine judgment is forever ended in Christ, only in Christ. The Lord God sent confusion in his wrath, to foil the schemes of hell. But when God pours upon us the Spirit of grace and supplication and turns our hearts to Christ, as he did on the Day of Pentecost (Acts 2), the confusion is over (Col 3:10-11). All who would know, worship, and be saved by God, must come out of Babel, the religion of the cursed, and flee to Christ (2Co 6:12 to 2Co 7:1; Rev 18:1-4).

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible

one language

The history of Babel (“confusion”) strikingly parallels that of the professing Church.

(1) Unity Gen 11:1 –the Apostolic Church Act 4:32; Act 4:33

(2) Ambition Gen 11:4 using worldly, not spiritual means Gen 11:3 ending in a man-made unity–the papacy;

(3) the confusion of tongues Gen 11:7 –Protestantism, with its innumerable sects.

(See Scofield “Isa 13:1”).

Fuente: Scofield Reference Bible Notes

am 1757, bc 2247

was: Isa 19:18, Zep 3:9, Act 2:6

language: Heb. lip

speech: Heb. words

Reciprocal: Gen 10:5 – after his Gen 10:20 – General Gen 11:6 – the people

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

OF ONE LANGUAGE

And the whole earth was of one language, and of one speech.

Gen 11:1

The New Testament is always converting into blessings the curses of the Old Testament. The burdens and severities of the Law are not only the types but the very substances of Gospel liberty and truth; the confusion of Babel leads to a greater harmony, and its dispersion ends in a more perfect union.

I. After the Flood the whole earth was of one language and one speech. Now not even one country has one language within itself. No two persons that ever meet have it. The words may have the same spelling, but they do not carry to the hearer exactly the same sense in which they were spoken. There is not on this earth, in any fraction of it, one language and one speech; hence a great part of our sin and misery.

II. Even if there were a language perfectly the same, yet, until there was a setting to rights of disorders which have come into human thought, and until minds were themselves set in one accord, there could not he unity.

III. The men of the old world determined to do two things which real unity never does. They resolved to make a great monument to their own glory, and they thought to frustrate a law of God and to break a positive rule of our being. Their unity was a false unity. They sought their own praise, and it ran contrary to the mind of God. Their profane unity was dashed into hundreds of divergent atoms, and was carried by the four winds to the four corners of the earth.

IV. What were the consequences of this scattering of the race? (1) It carried the knowledge of the true God and of the one faith into all the lands whither they went; (2) God replenished the whole surface of the globe by spreading men over it; (3) it was a plea for prayer, an argument for hope, a pledge of promise.

V. From that moment God has steadily carried on His design of restoring unity to the earth. His choosing of Abraham, His sending of Christ, the coming of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost, were all means to this very end.

Rev. Jas. Vaughan.

Illustration

(1) One of the chief external hindrances to the spread of the Gospel is the confusion of tongues, such as we read of at the building of the tower of Babel. A strange language which the missionary meets when he crosses a sea or a mountain range, is like a wall that stops his progress, saying, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further. The men of Galilee, at Pentecost, surmounting that difficulty by a miracle of Divine power, might have sung with David, By my God assisting me I overleap a wall. Should we not break forth on every side and burst through or overleap the barrier of strange tongues and all other barriers that stand in the way, and never rest until the kingdoms of the world are become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ?

(2) A Hindoo and New Zealander met upon the deck of a missionary ship. They had been converted from their heathenism and were brothers in Christ; but they could not speak to each other. They pointed to their Bibles, shook hands, and smiled in one anothers faces; but that was all. At last a happy thought occurred to the Hindoo. With sudden joy he exclaimed Hallelujah. The New Zealander in delight cried out Amen. These two words, not found in their own heathen tongues, were to them the beginning of one language and one speech.

Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary

The closing verse of Gen 10:1-32 alluded to the distribution of the nations of the earth after the flood. The first nine verses of Gen 11:1-32 tell us how that division came about. For some time after the flood nations did not exist. All men were descendants of Noah: a rapidly increasing family, but all speaking alike.

As time went on population increased and the urge to push outward from the original centre became irresistible. The pioneers of this movement were doubtless the more daring and forceful individuals, who soon became conscious that their migration from the centre of things might entail a loss of prestige and power. This they determined to remedy by a bold stroke.

Human history had recommenced under Noah in the mountainous region of Ararat: they now found themselves on a flat and uninteresting plain with no commanding heights. So they would build themselves a city surrounding a tower of immense height, and thus make themselves a name. When considering the last verse of Gen 4:1-26, we noted that the name Seth gave his son was significant, for Enos means mortal and weak. He recognized man’s frail mortal nature, and it is at once said that then men began to call on the name of the Lord. What is now before us is in direct contrast with that. Here were men full of self-sufficiency and self-importance bent upon making a name for themselves.

The expression, “Go to” is old fashioned. Today we should say, “Come on.” They incited one another in their course of self-aggrandisement. They had left the regions where stone was plentiful so they invented brick-making, and the “slime,” or “bitumen,” which abounds in the Mesopotamian plain served them as mortar. The Nimrod episode had taken place somewhat earlier. That was one man exalting himself at the expense of his fellows The tower of Babel episode was mankind concerting together for their own self-glorification in the establishing of a great centre of power and influence.

It is an interesting fact that the archaeologists, who explore the ruined cities of the Mesopotamian plain, often allude to the “ziggurat” that is, a large elevated structure – around which the city was originally grouped. So the tower idea was evidently quite popular in those far-off days. They became the “high places” where idols and idol sacrifices flourished.

The tower of Babel may well have been the start of man’s lapse into idolatry, for we know that in later centuries Babylon was recognized as the original home and mother of idolatry: see Jer 51:7 and Rev 17:4, Rev 17:5.

Upon all these doings the eyes of the Lord rested. He not only saw its immediate significance but foresaw its ultimate development, as is so strikingly presented in verse Gen 11:6. He knew the capacities with which He had endowed mankind, and the imaginations that would fill their minds as fallen creatures. Those imaginations are only evil continually, as we read in Gen 6:5. If the human race remained in unbroken unity, to develop into hundreds of millions, all their evil imaginations would find speedy accomplishment. The Creator knew that man, His creature, had such powers and capacities as would enable him ultimately to accomplish all he imagined to do. Hence His action in confounding the language of the spreading families of mankind, thus putting a heavy brake on the wheels of man’s chariot of progress.

We may pause to observe that now, for the last century or two there has been renewed effort to consolidate the human race. There have been efforts to provide a universal language. Scientific and technical knowledge is much more freely pooled, and in result things have been achieved that 200 years ago would have seemed simply incredible. The ancients entertained the imagination of men flying like birds. A century ago romances were written of men travelling beneath the seas. The imagination was there, but will it ever be translated into fact? It did not look like it! Yet the Lord had said, “Nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.” We have reached the twentieth century after Christ, and lo! these things are done.

We are living in an age when there is being unfolded before our eyes the implications of Gen 11:6. Had it not been for the confusion of language the atom bomb would have arrived far earlier in the world’s history, and mankind well-nigh destroyed itself long ago. ‘The Governor of the nations acted in judgment at Babel, and we can thank Him that He did so, since an element of mercy was enfolded in His judgment.

The scattering of mankind into language groups was the inevitable result, and the building of Babel was halted. Each individual had of necessity to go with those who spoke as he did, and each language group naturally separated itself from the others, who became foreigners to it, and with whom at the outset no intelligent intercourse was possible, Hence by this one act of God, the fruit of His wisdom and power, the plans of men were brought to nothing. Their purpose had been centralization, lest they should be scattered. The Divine act produced in the simplest possible way the very thing they aimed at preventing.

We regard this as a sign given in the very early days of the present world system of how God will always react in the presence of men’s evil schemes and projects. Consequently men are again and again bringing upon themselves the things they aim at avoiding. And not only so, they also produce “Babel,” that is, confusion. Was ever mankind so full of ideas and theories and projects as today? And was ever the earth more filled with confusion? We may be sure that though the mills of God’s. government grind slowly they grind with precision. Earth’s outlook is terrifying apart from the blessed hope of the coming of the Lord.

Verse Gen 11:10 starts the fifth paragraph or division of the book; Gen 10:1-32 began the generations of the sons of Noah. We now come to the generations of Shem, one of the shortest of these divisions. It extends only to the end of verse Gen 11:26, and gives us names and ages of the patriarchs descended from Shem up to the time of Abraham. As to these we have only two things to remark; the first being that, as before noted in connection with the ages of the patriarchs before the flood, there is again discrepancy between the Hebrew Scriptures and the Septuagint, as explained when we considered Gen 5:1-32. Any chronology that may be deduced as to the lapse of time between Shem and Abraham is rendered doubtful to the extent of 650 years.

The second remark concerns verse Gen 11:26, from which we should be inclined to assume that Abram was the eldest son of Terah, born when his father was 70 years old. But Gen 12:1 quite definitely states that Terah died in Haran aged 205 years; verse Gen 11:4 of that chapter states with equal plainness that Terah being dead (see Act 7:4) Abram left Haran, aged 75 years, and not 135 years as we should have expected. The conclusion to be drawn appears to be that Terah’s family commenced when he was 70 years of age, that Abram was not born till he was 130, but that he is mentioned first in verse Gen 11:26 because Terah’s other children were of small importance compared with him. These things should surely teach us that God is concerned with moral and spiritual considerations rather than those of a chronological kind.

The generations of Terah begin with verse Gen 11:27, and do not end until we reach the death of Abraham in Gen 25:1-34. As to Terah himself, we learn at the end of our chapter that Ur of the Chaldees was his home, and that late in his life he left Ur to go to the land of Canaan, but stopped at Haran on his way. With him he had Abram and Sarai together with Lot his grandson. Milcah, who was Nahor’s wife, is also mentioned, inasmuch as her descendants come into the history of God’s ways later on.

But, as we open Gen 12:1-20, a new fact of great importance is mentioned. This migration of Terah from Ur of the Chaldees, just stated, really took place at the instance of Abram, to whom God had spoken, calling him to a life of separation from his old associations. He was to cut his links with country, kindred and even his father’s house; that is, with his national, his social, and his domestic circles, in order to go to a land that God would indicate. The full significance of this will be better appreciated if, before going further, we read Jos 24:2, then the opening of Stephen’s address in Act 7:1-60, and also Heb 11:8-10.

There is no mention of idolatry amongst the evils that filled the earth during the antediluvian age. By the time of Abram the post-diluvian apostasy that started with Nimrod and Babel, had developed; idolatry was overspreading the peoples, and threatening to exclude the true knowledge of God. It had got amongst the descendants of Shem and even Terah, if not Abram himself, had been infected by it. To preserve a testimony to Himself God called Abram clean out of the evil, to become a pilgrim and stranger in the earth. Mankind was already divided into nations under the Divine government: it was now to witness a division of another kind – the separation of a godly seed from the mass of the ungodly. This was a division produced by Divine grace.

To the men of Ur Abram’s departure from their city with all its civilized amenities doubtless appeared as foolish an act as that of Noah had appeared, when he built his ark on dry ground – foolish indeed but unimportant and soon to be forgotten. We now look back to it, nearly 4,000 years after it happened, and realize it to have been an epoch-making event, establishing a principle of God’s ways, the effect of which will abide to the end of time. From that moment God’s work in the world has been based on the calling out of a people for Himself and separating them from the ungodly. From Abraham sprang the nation of Israel, who were separated under His government. Today the church is being called out and separated under His grace. In the coming age He will separate a people for millennial blessing under His Judgment.

Verses Gen 11:2-3 show us that the man of faith, separated to God, obtains what the men of the world aim at and miss. The builders of Babel desired to make themselves a great name by concentration, and brought down upon themselves a curse, and their names have long been utterly obliterated. God made Abram’s name great in his separation by faith, and through him all the families of the earth have been blessed. No name from those early ages has remained so great and famous as his. It is known and reverenced even today by millions – not only by Christians and Jews, but by Mohammedans also. The promises of these two verses have been amply fulfilled in the 4,000 years since they were spoken, and supremely so by the coming of Christ.

Verses Gen 11:4-5 declare that though Abram was detained at Haran until the death of Terah, he did ultimately reach the land to which God called him, taking with him his nephew Lot and all their possessions. The following verses show that, having reached it, God again appeared to him, and confirmed the promise of the land to his seed as well as to himself. In that early day the descendants of Canaan, the son of Ham, who had come under the curse of Noah, were in possession of the land. Fully 400 years had yet to pass before the curse would fall upon them by Israel taking forcible possession; and meanwhile Abram- was a pilgrim in a tent, but in touch with God and building an altar to Him in the places of his sojourn. Nevertheless from that moment there can be no question as to those who are the rightful owners of that land. To Abram’s seed it belongs today, though it will need an act of God to put them in possession in a lasting way, just as their ejection from it, both under Nebuchadnezzar and under the Romans, were acts of God.

Abram had been called of God and greatly blessed in responding to the call. He was pre-eminently the man of faith, yet the Scripture does not hide from us his occasional weakness and failure. God had called him to Canaan and not to Egypt. Yet when famine arose he does not appear to have asked counsel of God, but down to Egypt he went. By so doing he doubtless escaped the famine, but he ran into difficulties that he had not faith to meet. Have we not often had to discover that a way which to worldly wisdom seems eminently wise, leads us into a position of spiritual danger? In Abram’s case this dawned upon him as he neared the borders of Egypt. With all its splendour and affluence the morals of Egypt were deplorably low and he sensed danger.

The simple ruse that Abram suggested to Sarai was not the telling of a downright lie, since Sarai was. his half-sister, as we find in Gen 20:12, yet it worked disastrously. It was just that kind of half-truth, or half-lie, which so often has been a snare to true saints of God. Men of the world may do that kind of thing and apparently be gainers, but if saints of God descend to that level they are always ultimately the losers.

His first thought was for his own life, and then for Sarai’s virtue. The situation developed very much as he expected, but the outcome was not at all what he expected, inasmuch as God intervened. His mistake lay just there. In this move he had left God out of his calculations, though in the main purport of his life he was a man of faith. Thus it often is with us: we may trust Him in the big things, yet forget to refer to Him in the smaller things.

The Lord intervened so drastically in the plaguing of Pharaoh’s house that even that heathen monarch woke up to the facts of the situation and acted rightly. And not only so, but he also rebuked Abram. Now it is a sorry situation when a man of the world can rightly rebuke a man of faith. But so it was here, and so alas! it has too often been since. Let us all be concerned that we do not find ourselves in such a situation.

As Gen 13:1-18 opens we find Abram returning into the south parts of Canaan and making his way back to the spot between Bethel and Hai, where he had raised an altar when first he came into the land of promise. This was the spot where he had been in touch with God and where he should have stayed instead of going down into Egypt.

Back at the old spot, we read, “there Abram called on the name of the Lord.” The interrupted communion was restored, since he had got back, so to speak, to his first love. Here is a record which is intended to make us “wise unto salvation” from backsliding of a similar kind.

Now that we have Abram back in his right place, let us sum up the situation. The world system started by men realizing that they could achieve as a community what they could not as mere individuals. They aimed at glorifying themselves by the building of a city as a permanent centre of influence, and a mighty tower, which would be used ultimately – if not immediately – for idolatrous purposes, and for getting into touch with the demon powers which lay behind the idols.

Abram is called by God out of that world system. Instead of a city of bricks and bitumen he had but a flimsy tent, which could be taken down in an hour. Instead of a lofty and imposing tower he had a lowly altar, whereon were offered the sacrifices that were according to God’s thoughts. And there he called on the name of the Lord, and entered into communion with Him instead of falling a prey to the deceits instigated by demons.

The world system has developed, but it has not changed its essential features. Let us see to it that we pursue a path through it in keeping with the way pursued by Abram.

Fuente: F. B. Hole’s Old and New Testaments Commentary

The Tower of Babel

Gen 11:1-9

INTRODUCTORY WORDS

We will give some suggestion as to the connecting link between our last study, and today’s. There are two outstanding considerations.

1. Noah’s drunkenness. Noah lived three hundred and fifty years after the flood. Just when he began to be a husbandman we may not know, probably soon after he had adjusted himself to his new environment, inasmuch as his sons were still with him.

As to his drunkenness we may observe:

(1) God tells the unvarnished truth about His best men. There was no effort in the Bible account to condone Noah’s act. The Word merely says, “He drank * * wine, and was drunken.” Whether Noah knew that his wine drinking would make him drunk, we know not; we know, nevertheless, that he was drunk. We do not, however, hear of his getting drunk again.

(2) Good and great men err. Moses, and David, and Paul, and Peter, and you, and I, have all sinned. We trust that none of us have ever gone to the lengths that some have gone-yet, we have sinned. Saints may sin, however, they do not need to sin. John has said, “These things write I unto you, that ye sin not”; then He added, “If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the Righteous.”

(3) The sins of saints shame God. To this day we look back at the sins of certain mighty Bible men, and we feel the sense of shame that comes over us. That is not all. In each case God was also shamed.

The Name of the Lord Jesus is continually blasphemed by those who profess to be His followers.

2. The generations of Noah. We have before us the latter part of Gen 11:1-32. It will be profitable to study it in connection with the genealogy of Gen 5:1-32.

Adamwas born4004B.C.

Sethwas born3874″whenAdamwas130yearsold.

Enoswas born3769″”””235″”

Cainanwas born3679″”””325″”

Mahalaleelwas born3609″”””395″”

Jaredwas born3544″”””460″”

Enochwas born3382″”””622″”

Methuselahwas born3317″”””687″”

Lamechwas born3130″”””874″”

Adam died3074″”Methuselah”243″”

Enoch translated3017″”””300″”

Seth died2962″”””355″”

Noahwas born2948″”””369″”

Enos died2864″”””453″”

Cainan died2769″”””548″”

Mahalaleel died2714″”””603″”

Jared died2582″”””735″”

Japhethwas born2448″”””865″”

Hamwas born2447″”””866″”

Shemwas born2446″”””867″”

Lamech died2353″”””864″”

Methuselah died2348″The year of the flood869″”

2348The Flood

Arphaxedwas born2346″whenNoahwas602yearsold

Salahwas born2311″”””637″”

Eberwas born2281″”””667″”

Pelegwas born2247″”””701″”

Reuwas born2217″”””731″”

Serugwas born2185″”””763″”

Nahorwas born2155″”””793″”

Terahwas born2126″”””822″”

Haranwas born2056″”””892″”

Peleg died2006″”””940″”

Nahor died2007″”””941″”

1998″”””950″”

Abraham was born1996″Two years after Noah died.

Shem died1846″when Abraham was150yearsold.

“and Isaac was50″”

Abraham died1821″when Isaac was75″”

“and Jacob was15″”

A Few Striking Suggestions

1.All those in the Line of Christ from Adam to Noah died before the flood.

2.Adam lived to see the line of the Seed of the woman pass through nine generations without a single death along the whole lineage. This means that the firsthand story of creation could have been told by Adam to Lamech, who was Noah’s father. Adam died when Lamech was 56 years old.

3.Methuselah who died in the year of the flood lived for 243 years before Adam died, and 600 years after Noah was born.

4.Noah lived 84 years as a contemporary of Enos, Adam’s grandson, and Enos was born 325 years after Adam was created. Noah also lived to within 2 years of Abraham’s birth. Thus Noah could have gotten from Adam’s grandson the story of creation, and could have told it in person to Terah, Abraham’s father.

5.Adam lived 243 years during Methuselah’s lifetime. Methuselah lived 98 years during Shem’s lifetime. Shem lived 150 years during Abraham’s lifetime, and 50 years during Isaac’s lifetime. Thus, either Abraham or Isaac could have received firsthand the story of Enoch’s translation, and thirdhand the story of creation.

6.Enoch’s translation was 57 years after Adam’s death. Therefore, Adam lived 243 years of the period in which Enoch walked with God.

7.Moses was born only 64 years after Joseph died. Moses could have been in touch with some one who knew Joseph. Joseph knew Isaac and Jacob. They both knew Shem; Shem knew Methuselah, and Methuselah knew Adam. (This was not only possible, but probable.)

However, remember that Jehovah God knew all of these men, and He apart from any of them, could have given to Moses and the Prophets an inerrant revelation of all history, including creation, for God was before all things.

I. THE UNIFICATION OF THE RACE (Gen 11:1)

We judge that the great bulk of people, up to the time of Babel, sought to cluster together. We have always been taught that in unity there is strength. That, no doubt, is true, but it is true in a twofold sense:

1. Unity for God is to be desired. Jesus Christ prayed, “That they all might be one.” The Holy Spirit baptizes us in the one Spirit into the one body. Paul says, “That there be no divisions among you.”

The effort of the devil is to divide saints into group upon group, all speaking a different “shibboleth.” “Warring factions” is Satan’s specialty in church life. Paul, in spirit, wrote-“It hath been declared * * that there are contentions among you.” He wrote again-“I beseech Euodias, and beseech Synthyche, that they be of the same mind in the Lord.”

How beautiful it is for brethren to dwell together in unity! However, unity among saints is based upon and never contrary to the vitals of the faith; it must not be a union of darkness with light, or, a fellowship of the believer with the unbeliever. True unity under one head and in one faith is a source of great power in the Church, and is to be greatly desired.

2. Unity against God is to be deplored. Some one may say that if God calls upon saints to be one, why should He deprecate the confederation of the wicked? This is what the Lord said of the Babel: “Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they will begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do.” God saw in the amalgamation of the race that they would set themselves together against the Lord, and against His Christ. They would encourage one another in their effort against God. They would seek to gather all their forces into one great united effort against everything that would tend to their spiritual allegiance to the Most High.

II. THE UNIFICATION OF THE LAST DAYS (Psa 2:2)

The spirit that dominated the race in the days of the building of Babel, is once more gripping the hearts of men.

1. First of all modern invention has made a big world, a little one. Geographic lines no longer separate nations; even great seas fail to keep them apart. We sit at our breakfast table with our daily paper and we have before us. the whole world, with the outstanding and epochal events of the day before.

No one nation can do anything, without affecting every other nation under Heaven. Every time a country goes to war the whole world dreads a possible international conflagration. The monetary conditions of one land affect every other land.

Fast railroad trains, the telegraph, the telephone, the air-ship, and the radio tie the earth into one great network woven and interwoven in indescribably effective relationships.

2. Modern political tendencies trend toward a United States of Nations. During the World War the Allies found it necessary to place one general at the head of the united armies. There is much talk today about one man stepping forward and taking headship over the whole earth. We, ourselves, heard a man from India speaking from the Round Table in London and contending that the only hope of the nations in the restoration of prosperity and in the establishment of world peace, lay in a monarch with universal authority and sway. He even went so far as to say, that he would like to be that monarch.

Mussolini has the restoration of a greater Roman Empire in view. Political leaders in France have not hesitated to voice the sentiment of a united government.

III. THE LAND OF THE ANCIENT CONFEDERACY (Gen 11:2)

If we open our Bibles to the Book of Zechariah we will discover that there is a woman sitting in the midst of the Ephah. The Ephah was lifted up and there came out two women, and the wind was in their wings; for they had wings like the wings of a stork: and they lifted up the Ephah between the earth and the heaven. The Prophet said unto the angel, “Whither do these bear the ephah?” “And he said unto me, To build it an house in the land of Shinar: and it shall be established, and set there upon her own base.”

Zechariah’s vision is a vision of the end time. The ephah was a measuring container, and it stands for commercialism. Commercialism, in the last days, will be reestablished in the land of Shinar. Satan will re-enact upon this very earth, and in the very same locality, the efforts toward unification which were put forth at Babel.

A fuller description of this Babel, which became known as Babylon, is given in the 18th chapter of Revelation.

Commercial unification is the dominant thought of present-day world leaders. Great monopolies dominate all business. It is the combine which squeezes out the “little man,” and establishes the rich. We speak of different commodities being “pooled.” We think in the language of chain stores. We read frequently in our great dailies of the great trusts. On every hand are combines, federations, monopolies, amalgamations and submersions. The tendency is toward the centralization of power, under the unification of control. All of this will be consummated in a startling and amazing manner before the present age will have passed.

IV. BABEL STANDS FOR THE PRIDE OF MAN (Gen 11:4)

The purpose of the great tower which they proposed to build, and whose top was to reach unto Heaven, was to make unto themselves a name. They thought that they would thus centralize the peoples of the world about themselves. That their city would become the center of all activity. All of this was consummate pride.

The spirit of pride which dominated them, in those olden days, still dominates the world. The great Expositions which are held every decade or two by the outstanding nations, are held in order to magnify the power and prowess of men.

The tower reaching up into Heaven suggests unto us how man would exalt himself on the one hand unto Deity, and on the other hand how he would debase God to the level of humanity. The spirit of this age is duplicating the age described in our study.

The spirit of our age, is the spirit of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. Nebuchadnezzar said, “Is not this great Babylon, that I have built for the house of the kingdom by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty?”

V. THE PRIDE OF MAN WILL CONCENTRATE IN THE ANTICHRIST (2Th 2:4)

The spirit of Babel which said, “We will make us a name” was the continuation of the spirit of Satan, who said, “Ye shall be as gods”; it was also the spirit of antichrist who will oppose and exalt himself above all that is called God, “so that he as God sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.”

The false prophet will cause all to worship the image of the antichrist. The mark of the antichrist, and the number of his name will be, as it were, the signet for all commercial activity among men.

Nebuchadnezzar was a fit picture of this coming man of sin. Nebuchadnezzar held autocratic sway, “whom he would he slew; and whom he would he kept alive; and whom he would he set up; and whom he would he put down.” The fact is that “all people, nations, and languages, trembled and feared before him.” The antichrist will hold a like power and sway. King Nebuchadnezzar also lifted his heart up, and his mind was hardened in pride.

This spirit of self-exaltation which grew to such an alarming height in Babel, is becoming more and more the spirit of the day. The nations are fast becoming men-worshipers. The creature is being placed above the Creator, who is blessed forever.

Let us come and fall down before the Lord, and let us worship. What is man, that God should be mindful of him? His breath is in his nostrils, and he shall soon be cut off. All of his glory and pride shall be brought down to the dust.

VI. THE CONFOUNDING OF THE LANGUAGES AND THE SCATTERING OF MEN (Gen 11:7-8)

The Lord God caused men to speak in various tongues and languages. The result was that confusion reigned everywhere. Men sought out those who spoke as they spoke, and finally they went forth in various directions over the earth.

Babel stands for confusion. Unto this day we speak of a “babel of voices.” There is an effort now on foot to promulgate some universal language. This in line with the present hour trend toward centralization and confederation.

Sin always brings confusion. Where God reigns there is order, and symmetry, and peace. Man’s effort to bring peace, apart from the Prince of Peace, is futile. War and strife and fightings will continue until Christ comes.

How easily did God speak the word that caused men to speak in many tongues! God will once again speak the word. With the breath of His lips, and with the brightness of His coming, He will destroy the antichrist. The mighty men of earth, and the great men, will go into the rocks and the dens of the earth for fear of the Lord, and for the glory of His Majesty, when He shall arise to shake terribly the earth.

VII. THE DESTRUCTION OF THE WORLD’S GREATEST BABYLON (Rev 18:2)

1. Babylon will be rebuilded in all of its former glory. The first Babel was cast down. The second Babylon, under Nebuchadnezzar the Great, which attained to so great a pre-eminence, was cast down. A third Babylon, surpassing the glory of the former, is yet to be builded. This third and last Babylon will be the seat of the antichrist; it will be the commercial headquarters of the world.

All nations will partake in her fornication. The merchants of the earth will wax rich through the abundance of her delicacies. She will glorify herself, and live deliciously. She will sit as a queen. Her merchandise will be the merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all manner of wood, and vessels of ivory. She will deal in costly odors, and ointments, and frankincense, and wine, and oil, and fine flour, and wheat, and beasts, and sheep, and horses, and chariots. She will possess slaves, and traffic in the souls of men.

2. Babylon will fall. God hath spoken. Even now we hear the angel, saying with a strong voice, “Babylon the great is fallen, * * and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit.”

When Babylon falls, God will say, “Reward her even as she rewarded you, and double unto her according to her works.” “How much she hath glorified herself, and lived deliciously, so much of torment and sorrow give her.”

The king’s of the earth will behold her burning. The merchants will bemoan her fall. The masters of ships, and sailors, who were made rich by trading with her, will cry, “Alas, alas!” Our call to one and all, is,-“Come out of her, * * that ye be not partakers of her sins, that ye receive not of her plagues.”

AN ILLUSTRATION

LLOYD GEORGE AND THE SECOND COMING

The Coming of Christ is the only hope of a world under the throes of coming judgments:

“After Miss Pankhurst’s address Lloyd George said: ‘Miss Pankhurst has addressed a very serious appeal to us on very grave matters-matters of grave moment to us all. I endorse everything she has said. No one contemplating the position of the world at the present moment can be free from misgiving as to what may be in store for us in the future. With great eloquence and force, and great foundation of truth, she has probed the subject, She called attention to the fact that we are moving rapidly on toward the next war. Armaments are more powerful than ever, more men are trained in arms, and the machinery of war is far more destructive than we should have thought possible in the early days of the war. Year by year we were devising more machinery till by the end of the war, the machinery for human slaughter and destruction was infinitely more powerful than in 1914, and we have been going on devising more powerful methods of destruction ever since. We are spending more money on preparations for war, far more money, in this and every country in the world, than in 1914.

It is time there should be some new thoughts, some new idea, and an arresting appeal to some force outside and above the world. I expect our interpretation of the Lord’s Second Advent might not in all details be the same if we compared notes, but we know that the first advent will be to accomplish it.

The twentieth century has seen the greatest war there has ever been, and still the world goes on preparing for greater destruction than before. There is a need for the Second Coming to put that right The world has not yet heard the message that was heralded by the angels.

I agree with what the speaker has said-that we might have Covenants of the League of Nations, Geneva and Locarno Pacts, Kellogg Agreements among all nations that war shall be outlawed, but we have not reached peace until there is a complete change of heart among the nations, and we want it not only in nations but in the individuals.

It is by such messages as hers (Miss Pankhurst’s) delivered far and wide, that the cause of peace can be advanced, and I wish that the message we have listened to tonight could be delivered to millions here-and in America-and on the Continent of Europe.

I would like, on your behalf, personally to thank Miss Pankhurst, and to say with what gladness I have heard the message she has given.'”-Quarterly of the Scripture Testament League.

Fuente: Neighbour’s Wells of Living Water

THE TOWER OF BABEL

The contents of this chapter seem to precede in time those of chapter 10. There we have the story of how the nations were divided, and here why they were divided. What was true of the race linguistically until this time (Gen 11:1)? To what locality had they been chiefly attracted (Gen 11:2)? What new mechanical science is now named (Gen 11:3)? What two-fold purpose was the outcome of this invention (Gen 11:4)? What was the object in view? Is there a suggestion of opposition to the divine will in the last phrase of that verse? (Gen 9:1 and Gen 1:28.) If we take Gen 11:5 literally, it suggests a theophany like that in chapter 18, but perhaps the writer is speaking in an accommodated sense. He means that Gods mind was now fastened on this act of human disobedience and rebellion, for such it seems to be. Notice the divine soliloquizing in Gen 11:6, and the reasoning it represents:

This people are united by the fact that they have but one language; this union and sense of strength have led to their present undertaking; and success here will generate other schemes in opposition to My purposes and to their disadvantage; therefore this must be frustrated. What was the divine plan of frustration (Gen 11:7)? What was the result (Gen 11:8)? What name was given this locality, and why (Gen 11:9)? (Observe that Babylon and Babel are the same.) With this blow of the avenging rod of God came to an end the third experiment God was making with the apostate race. They had again turned their backs on God, making haste to caste into oblivion the terrible lesson of the flood; and so with the confusion of their speech God delivered them up to the lusts of their own hearts. (Compare Rom 1:28.)

QUESTIONS

(1)From which of Noahs sons did the Hebrews descend?

(2)What peoples are the descendants of Japheth?

(3)Who seemed to aspire after the first world monarch?

(4)What distinction in the account of the origin of the nations is seen between chapters 10 and 11?

(5)What came to an end at this period?

Fuente: James Gray’s Concise Bible Commentary

One Language

“Now the sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And Ham was the father of Canaan. These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole earth was populated” ( Gen 9:18-19 ). A brief description of the various nations which came out of each son is found in chapter 10.

Chapter 11 opens with a statement the modern reader may find startling. “Now the whole earth had one language and one speech.” Anyone who has ever been in a foreign country has longed for a common language. Even the simplest request becomes difficult when we cannot understand one another. Immediately after the flood, men understood each other.

The word for “journeyed” literally means, “to pluck up (tent pegs)” according to John T. Willis. Apparently, the people were nomadic. Their journeys eventually brought them to the land of Shinar. Bible students will recognize its later, more familiar name, Babylon, or modern day Iraq ( Gen 10:10 ).

Fuente: Gary Hampton Commentary on Selected Books

Gen 11:1-2. The whole earth was of one language This even heathen writers acknowledge; and that language was, probably, the Hebrew. They journeyed from the east of Shinar, where Noah had settled when he left the ark. They were, therefore, now travelling westward.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Gen 11:1. One language or lip. These words are to be literally understood, because it is added, God confounded their language. There has been a long and unavailing dispute whether the Chaldaic, the Hebrew, or the Arabic was the most ancient language. But since the oriental languages were studied, this subject has been discussed with more success. Epiphanius, a bishop of the fourth age, wrote in five languages, and he gives the name of dialects, not distinct languages, to the families whose tongue God confused. The learned Professor Ihre of Sweden has proved, that the Gothic, the Hebrew, and the Persic had one origin, the radicals of innumerable words being the same. Our Sir William Jones, (discourse 6.) affirms that all the languages of India have descended from the language once spoken in the empire of Iran, which the French write Irak or Erech, Genesis 10.; that is, Persia. The Greek, the Gothic, the Latin, the Irish, the Welsh, have one origin, for in all the numerals, one, two, three are the same, and are scarcely varied in spelling. If we had records of the old Greek before the schools altered it, the coincidence between the Gothic and the Greek would be yet more striking. Our missionaries in Ceylon have found a long list of words which have at least one radical letter or more remaining, of the Hebrew and the English. The doctrine of Moses is therefore established beyond dispute, that the whole world had one origin, and one tongue. The confusion at Babel was but a variation of dialect and names, as is wittily described by Du Bartus, a French poet translated by Sylvester, and quoted here by John Trapp.

Bring me, quoth one, a trowel quickly, quick

One brings him up a hammer;

hew this brick Another bids, and then they cleave a tree;

Make fast this rope, and then they let it flee.

One calls for plank, another mortar lacks;

They bring the first a stone, the last an axe.

Gen 11:4. A tower, said to be 5164 paces high, and the circumference equal to the elevation. Heylins Geog. A circuitous road was made on the outside so broad that carrs could pass one another. This tower, or temple as it was afterwards called, was not finished, it would seem, till the reign of Semiramis, which Herodotus thus describes. The temple of Jupiter Belus was in the city on the opposite side of the river (to that where the palace stood.) There was in the midst of the temple a tower, which was a furlong thick, and equal in height. Upon this tower was another, and then a third, and eight in all. It had a gradual ascent, and at each turn a recess, and a seat cut in the wall, where those who ascended might rest. In the last tower there was a chapel, &c. Clio. Of the first tower Abydenus, as quoted by Origen and afterwards by Eusebius, speaks thus. The first men were born of the earth, and of great bodily strength; and affecting great antiquity they built a tower of immense height, where Babylon is now situate. When they had raised it very high towards heaven, a great wind from the gods threw it down, and from its rude mass of ruins Babylon derives its name. Till that time men had all been of one language. Prparat. Gen 9:14.

From the above it is plain enough that the long-lived sires understood architecture, and consequently, geometry and the use of letters. Cadmus, as Pliny, lib. 5. c. 39, and others all agree: he adds, that the Pelasgians brought letters into Latium or Italy. lib. 8. c. 56. But the figure of the letters was long in a fluctuating state. In 1735, Placentinius published at Rome a work in 4to. entitled, Epitome Grc Palographi, &c. in which the author from manuscripts and ancient stones exhibits near 300 figures of the 22 letters which now compose that alphabet.

This subject is much relieved by the Scandinavian society. In 1742, Sir Erick Biorner published at Stockholm, Cogitationes critico philologic de orthographia Lingu Sveo Gothic, in which by fac similes of Runic stones, cut to promulgate laws, and to perpetuate the memory of expeditions, he proves that the Hebrew and the Gothic alphabets had an identity of origin. Many of the ancient letters are evidently the same; and where an apice, or a fulcrum is wanting, he supplies the supposed defect by a dotted line.

In 1781, Faciculus, or a collection of Latin tracts on Swedish antiquities, was published at Stockholm, in six volumes 8vo. edita a Car, Gjorwell, Biblioth. Regio. In this work, specimens of Swedish literature are exhibited, which refer to a very great antiquity. It is here asserted that Odin came from the river Tanais, or Tanaquisl, or Vanaquisl, now the Don; and that he brought letters with him, which Benzelius admits are very much like the old Greek alphabets in number, order, and power. He refers to a work, In Periculo Runico (pag. 29) ubi et schemata tam Ionicarum, quam Runicarum, exhibentur, in which a scheme of fac similes both Ionic and Runic is exhibited. He refers also to Memoires de litterature de l Academie des inscriptiones, tome 6. p. 616. He concludes that the alphabet used in the Scandinavian Runes, [mysteries] and on the stones, and sometimes on the contour clefts of Sweden, had emanated from a common fountain with the Cadmuan alphabet; and that those of Odin are found on monuments more ancient than those of Greece.Tomus 1. Sect. 8.

Gen 11:12. Arphaxad lived thirty five years and begat Salah. The Septuagint reads here, Arphaxad lived one hundred and thirty five years and begat Cainan;and Cainan lived one hundred and thirty five years and begat Salah. Luk 3:36. The rabbins contend that Arphaxad and Cainan are only different names for the same patriarch, which has some appearance of truth from the exact number of 135 years, before Salah, the next princely patriarch was begotten. Yet the chronology of those ancient times cannot be reconciled with the Hebrew Scriptures. Moses in the ninetieth Psalm says, Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, return ye children of men, for a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday. Whereas the chronology of Usher, as in our bibles, gives but 898 years to the death of Moses. It were desirable that the Chaldaic and the Hebrew chronology could be reconciled perfectly; but as we have fragments only of the Babylonian empire in Ctesias Cnidius, Diodorus Siculus, milius Sura, Castor, and Eusebius, neither Josephus, nor Afficanus, nor Eusebius, nor any of the moderns, as Petavius, Scaliger, Helvicus, Usher, nor Strauchius have been able to effectuate it. Diodorus says The reinforcements of men sent by the Assyrians, under the command of Memnon, son of Tithon, to the Trojans, deserves also to be remembered here: for under the reign of Teutamus, the twentieth king after Ninyas, the son of Semiramis, who ruled over all Asia, the Greeks engaged in a war against the Trojans under their general Agamemnon, above a thousand years after the Assyrians had been masters of Asia. Eusebius makes the above circumstance a fixed era of his chronology, which is given in the following table, which harmonises Moses, as in the LXX.

KINGSYears ReignedScalingers Julian PeriodOF ASSYRIA AND EVENTS

1. Belus602357Nimrod, who reigned 62, or 65 years: the first king and builder of Babel.

2. Ninus522412who conquered most of Asia in 17 years, and built a statue to Belus; hence Baal the idol. He crucified Pharnah king of the Medes, with his wife and children.

3. Semiramis422464who fought against the Bactrains like a

soldier and conquered Medea.

4. Ninyas382506who attacked the Scythians in Mount Caucasus.

5. Arius302544

6. Aralius402574or Aranos.

7. Xerxer, Balaius302614

8. Aramamithrus382644

9. Belochus352682called Biloch

10. Balaius522717

11. Altadus322769called Sethos by Syncell, in whose reign the hanging gardens were erected.

12.Mamythus302801or Mamiathus.

13. Mane, Ash282831or Manchalaios who reigned 30 years.

14. Sphaerus222859or Itaspheros who reigned according to Callisthienes 20 years.

15. Mamylus302881or Mamythus

16. Sparthaeus402011

17. Ascatades382953

18. Amyntes452991Actosai or Atossa, a second Semiramis, flourished after the death of Amyntes.

19. Belochus 2253036dethroned by Baltetares governor of his gardens.

20. Balatores303061Baltetares or Bellepares.

21. Lamprides303091

22. Sosares203121called Pesares.

23. Lampraes303141called Lamparos.

24. Panyas403171called Pannios.

25. Sosarmos223216surnamed Zeos, that is, god, by adulation.

26. Mithraeus273258Memmon of gigantic stature born.

27. Teutamu323285who sent 10,000 Ethiopians to assist Priam against the Greeks. Diodorus 2. c. 17. Troy was taken in the 22nd year of Mnesteus king of Athens.

28. Teutaeus443317called Eutaios. Tyncelle adds here four kings omitted by Eusebius, which occasions a difference of 116 years between Eusebius and Africanus.

29. Thinnaeus303523

30. Dercylus403553

31. Eupacmes383593or Eupalos.

32. Lausthenes453631

33. Pyritiades303676

34. Ophrataeus213706

35. Ephachares523727or Ophratenes.

36. Ocrazeres423779or Acrazapes, or Acracarnes.

37. Sardanapalus193821or Tonos Concoleros; Arbactus governor of Medea revolted, and after some years of

The years are13003841war Nineveh was taken in the 29th year of king Josiah. Thus Eusebius agrees with Justin, that the Assyrian Empire continued 1300 years, which, allowing for the uncertainty of the times, agrees in the main with Moses.

Gen 11:28. Haran diedin Ur of the Chaldees. St. Jerome says that Abraham set fire to the house of the idols, and that Haran perished in the flames while endeavouring to save his gods. The name of Ur, meaning fire, is probably a surname given to Haran, like that of Peleg, because he worshipped fire. The Lord did indeed accept offerings by fire from heaven, but it argued the most vain and foolish imagination in the magi to worship fire, as in the Egyptians to worship a bull. On this subject Herodotus says in Thalia, The Persians account fire to be a god; and for that reason neither the Persians nor the Egyptians burn the bodies of the dead, but salt and embalm them, lest they should be eaten of worms. This worship is still kept up. In the year 1818 Mr. Homer, missionary at Bombay, attended the festival of fire worship, fifty miles from Bombay, which is celebrated in the woods every four years, and continues for the space of five days. About fifty thousand people assembled. They dug holes in the earth to admit the air, and kindled over them large fires; and having hung the branches of trees with lamps, they commenced singing, dancing, and drinking; and it is awful to add, both sexes, from ten to seventy years of age, indulged in undisguised shame.

Gen 11:31. They came to Haran, a town so called from the patriarch, as also the river on whose shores he had lived.

REFLECTIONS.

We have here the second general and gradual apostasy of the human race, as descended from Noah, by pride, tyranny, and idolatry. The first acts of idolatry consisted in worshipping the hosts of heaven, as is stated by Eusebius. The sun in Hebrew is called shemesh, because he is the servant of God in administering equal light in the year to all the earth: and, no doubt, to teach mankind that they ought not to worship the servant but the Master who made the sun. The second acts of idolatry, according to Epiphanius, were to make household gods, the feigned likenesses of the angels who had appeared to the fathers. The third, and worst influx was, according to St. Paul, When they knew God, by the covenant of Noah and by the creation, they did not like to retain his holy religion, but likened the Godhead to birds, and beasts, and creeping things; for which cause God gave them up to vile affections. The fourth was that of the priests, in writing the Theogony of those gods, six thousand in number, as old Hesiod has done, and so to confirm the corruption by theological science. For this reason, the Hebrew Scriptures very often designate idolatry by walking in the imagination of the heart; or as our Saviour says, Ye worship ye know not what; idolatry having no foundation but in the imagination of the priests, who ought to have been the guardians of religion. We cannot pay even a secondary homage to the statue of any creature without attributing omnipresence to that creature, and by putting the world under its care. Yet we must own, that the grand enemy deceived those men by a notion that the Divinity himself was present in their statues and their temples.

On seeing the proud tower which reached the clouds, and the builders crushed beneath its ruins, pause, oh my soul, to utter thy feelings in tragic contemplations. Were the builders of Babel confounded for their pride and false glory, in wishing to exalt their name? And how many ambitious men have ruined themselves in the same way! Had they remained quiet in private life, what faction, strife and war they might have avoided; and how often have they been hurled from the summit of their grandeur to exile and misery!Was Babel, or Babylon, the seat of idolatry and tyranny? Then it was the more expressive figure of the papal power, and of antichristian idolatry; and God shall destroy the empire of the latter, as he has overthrown that of the former.But did wickedness so soon break out again in the new generation? We see then how deep is the natural depravity of man: it is a fountain in every age rushing forth in bitter streams. We see how soon men forget the judgments of God; and how awfully just it is that heaven should often repeat its blows.Did God mock and confound those proud men who raised their tower to the skies? Then let the pharisee learn how vain are all his efforts to reach heaven by his own works. The house built on the sand will fall in the day of tempest. There is no entrance into heaven but by Jesus Christ, who is gone before to prepare us a place.Did the seventy-two great families after their dispersion retain their habits of pastoral life, their acquaintance with poetry and music, and their religious customs? Then they afford us proof of divine revelation. The difference of their tongues was not effectuated either by conquest or civil compact, but by divine interposition. The origin of nations, the building of cities, and the progress of the arts, prove that the world in its present state has not existed long. In this view they all corroborate the truth of the inspired writer.

Fuente: Sutcliffe’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Genesis 11

This is a chapter of very deep interest to the spiritual mind. It records two great facts, namely, the building of Babel, and the call of Abraham; or, in other words, man’s effort to provide for himself, and God’s provision made known to faith; man’s attempt to establish himself in the earth, and God’s calling a man out of it, to find his portion and his home in heaven.

“And the whole earth was of one language and of one speech. And it came to pass, as they journeyed from the east, that they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there…… And they said, Go to, let us build us a city, and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” The human heart ever seeks a name, a portion, and a centre in the earth. It knows nothing of aspirations after heaven, heaven’s God, or heaven’s glory. Left to itself, it will ever and find its objects in this lower world; ever “build beneath the skies.” It needs God’s call, God’s revelation, and God’s power, to lift the heart above this present world, for man is a grovelling creature, alienated from heaven, and allied to earth. In the scene now before us, there is no acknowledgement no looking up to, or waiting on, Him; nor was it the thought of the human heart to set up a place in which God might dwell – to gather materials for the purpose of building a habitation for Him – alas! no; His name is never once mentioned. To make a name for himself was man’s object on the plain of Shinar; and such has been his object ever since. Whether we contemplate man on the plain of Shinar, or on the banks of the Tiber, we find him to be the same self-seeking, self-exalting, God-excluding creature, throughout. There is a melancholy consistency in all his purposes his principles, and his ways; he ever seeks to shut out God, and exalt himself.

Now, in what light soever we view this Babel confederacy, it is most instructive to see in it the early display of mans genius and energies regardless of God. In looking down along the stream of human history, we may easily perceive a marked tendency to confederacy or association. Man seeks, for the most part to compass his great ends in this way. Whether it be in the way of Philanthropy, Religion, or Politics, nothing can be done without an association of men regularly organised. It is well to see this principle – well to mark its incipient working – to see the earliest model which the page of inspiration affords of a human association, as exhibited on the plain of Shinar, in its design, its object, its attempt, its overthrow. If we look around us, at the present moment, we see the whole scene filled with associations. To name them were useless, for they are as numerous as are the purposes of the human heart. But it is important to mark, that the first of all these was the Shinar association, for the establishment of the human interests, and the exaltation of the human name – objects which may well be set in competition with any that engage the attention of this enlightened and civilised age. But, in the judgement of faith, there is one grand defect, namely, God is shut out; and to attempt to exalt man, without God, is to exalt him to a dizzy height, only that he may be dashed down into hopeless confusion, and irretrievable ruin. The Christian should only know one association, and that is, the Church of the living God, incorporated by the Holy Ghost, who came down from heaven as the witness of Christ’s glorification, to baptise believers into one body, and constitute them God’s dwelling-place. Babylon is the very opposite of this, in every particular; and she becomes at the close, as we know, “the habitation of devils.” (See Rev. 18)

“And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech. So the Lord scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of all the earth; and they left off to build the city.” Such was the end of man’s first association. Thus it will be to the end, “Associate yourselves, O ye people, and ye shall be broken in pieces….. gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces; gird yourselves, and ye shall be broken in pieces.” (Isa. 8: 9) How different it is when God associates men! In the second chapter of Acts, we see the blessed One coming down, in infinite grace, to meet man, in the very circumstances in which his sin had set him. The Holy Ghost enabled the messengers of grace to deliver their message in the very tongue wherein each was born. Precious proof this, that God desired to reach man’s heart with the sweet story of grace! The law from the fiery mount was not thus promulgated. When God was telling what man ought to be, He spoke in one tongue; but when He was telling what He Himself was, He spoke in many. Grace broke through the barrier which man’s pride and folly had caused to be erected, in order that every man might hear and understand the glad tidings of salvation – the wonderful works of God.” And to what end was this? Just to associate men on God’s ground, round God’s centre, and on God’s principles. It was to give them, in reality, one language, one centre, one object, one hope, one life. It was to gather them in such a way as that they never should be scattered or confounded again; to give them a name and a place which should endure for ever; to build for them a tower and city which should not only have their top reaching to heaven, but their imperishable foundation laid in heaven, by the omnipotent hand of God Himself. It was to gather them around the glorious Person of a risen and highly exalted Christ, and unite them all in one grand design of magnifying and adoring Him.

If my reader will turn to Revelation 7, he will find, at the close thereof, “ALL nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues,” standing round the Lamb; and, with one voice, ascribing all praise to Him. Thus the three scriptures may he read in most interesting and profitable connection. In Gen. 11 God gives various tongues as an expression of His judgement; in Acts 2 He gives various tongues as an expression of grace; and in Rev. 7 we see all those tongues gathered round the Lamb, in glory. How much better it is, therefore, to find our place in God’s association than in man’s! The former ends in glory, the latter in confusion; the former is carried forward by the energy of the Holy Ghost, the latter by the unhallowed energy of fallen man; the former has for its object the exaltation of Christ, the latter has for its object the exaltation of man, in some way or other.

Finally, I would say, that all who sincerely desire to know the true character, object, and issue of human associations, should read the opening verses of Genesis 11; and, on the other hand, all who desire to know the excellency, the beauty, the power, the enduring character of divine association, should look at that holy, living, heavenly corporation, which is called, in the New Testament, the Church of the living God, the body of Christ, the bride of the Lamb.

May the Lord enable us to look at, and apprehend, all these things, in the power of faith; for only in this way can they profit our souls. Points of truth, however interesting; scriptural knowledge, however profound and extensive; Biblical criticism, however accurate and valuable, may all leave the heart barren, and the affections cold. We want to find Christ in the Word; and, having found Him, to feed on Him by faith: This would impart freshness, unction, power, vitality, energy, and intensity, all of which we deeply stand in need of, in this day of freezing formalism. What is the value of a chilling orthodoxy without a living Christ, known in all His powerful, personal attractions? No doubt, sound doctrine is immensely important. Every faithful servant of Christ will feel himself imperatively called upon to “hold fast the form of sound words.” But, after all, a living Christ is the very soul and life, the joints and marrow, the sinews and arteries, the essence and substance of sound doctrine. May we, by the power of the Holy Ghost, see more beauty and preciousness in Christ, and thus be weaned from the spirit and principles of Babylon.

We shall, God willing, consider the remainder of Gen. 11 in the next section.

Fuente: Mackintosh’s Notes on the Pentateuch

Gen 11:1-9. The City, the Tower, and the Confusion of Speech.The section plainly belongs to J but not to the same stratum as the story of the Flood, nor is it consistent with the origin assigned to the various nations in Gen 11:10. It is an tiological story (p. 134), naturally not historical, answering the question, Why is it that though the races of mankind have sprung from a common ancestry they speak so many different languages? The Divine jealousy, which fears what a united humanity may achieve, whose first enterprise is planned on a scale so colossal, is like that shown in the prohibition of the tree of knowledge, the guarding of the tree of life, and the displeasure excited in Yahwehs mind by the angel marriages. The narrative presumably originated in Babylon, though no cuneiform parallel has been discovered, and it may have expressed the attitude of the nomads towards the buildings of Babylon rather than that of the Babylonians themselves. It has been adapted by the Heb. narrator; the explanation that brick and bitumen (mg.) were used in the building would be unnecessary in Babylonia, and the name Babel is derived from the Heb. verb. blal, to confound. The story hangs fairly well together. Observe, however, that whereas in Gen 11:5 Yahweh comes down to earth, in Gen 11:7 He is still in heaven. Gunkel has suggested that two stories have been combined, one relating the building of a city, the other that of a tower. He has succeeded by skilful analysis in constructing two stories, the former of which narrates the project to build a city and make a name, which was defeated by the confusion of their speech, hence the name Babel; while the latter narrates that to avoid dispersion they began to build a lofty tower, but were scattered over the earth, hence he infers that the name of the tower was Phts (i.e. Dispersion). This may quite well be correct, and the difficulty of harmonising Gen 11:5 with Gen 11:7 disappears. Otherwise, Gen 11:5 perhaps originally recorded the descent of a heavenly messenger on whose report Yahweh comments in Gen 11:6 f.

The district from which the start was made is uncertain, but perhaps E. of Babylonia is intended, in which case they wandered westwards and reached Shinar, i.e. Babylonia. There they made bricks and set to work on the city and tower. The latter is what the Babylonians called a zikkurat, i.e. an immense tower shaped like a pyramid, rising in terraces, and crowned with a temple, which was regarded as an entrance to heaven (cf. Gen 11:4). Possibly some unfinished or dilapidated structure may have given rise to the story. The intention of the buildings was to provide a rallying point and prevent their separation.

Gen 11:3. Go to: an archaism; we should say Come. Yahweh echoes it ironically in Gen 11:7.

Gen 11:7. let us: Yahweh addresses the Divine beings (cf. Gen 1:26*).

Gen 11:9. Babel really means Gate of God; the etymology here is popular.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

BABEL: THE CITY AND THE TOWER

Up to this time there was only one language. In the world today men wish they could have this advantage, but God is wiser than men. Men desire this for the very same reason that Caused God to impose various languages upon them. They are infected by pride that wants to unite independently of God, so as to have a great civilization.

They journeyed “from the east,” literally “from the sun rising.” This is strikingly typical of man’s turning his back upon the promise of the coming of Christ (“the Sun of righteousness arising with healing in His wings” – Mal 4:2). Forgetting the promise of God, they want to build a solid, united civilization for themselves. They have left the mountains and come down to the easier circumstance of the plain, where there is not the same exercise and endurance called for. Instead of trusting God they are moved by what appears to be their temporal advantage. They realize there is strength in unity, but they do not seek unity as in subjection to God. On the plain, of course, they found no stone for building, so they made brick from the available clay. “They had brick for stone and they had asphalt for mortar.” The Lord draws attention to the fact of these substitutions because He builds with stone — “living stones” (2Pe 2:5). Typical of believers who are the workmanship of God, not of men’s hands; and He uses the mortar of the Holy Spirit of God to join them together. Of course the brick does not endure as does stone, for it is man made.

Brick laying is much simpler than stone masonry, because the bricks are all cast in the same mold. People who are merely converts of man are formed by the particular teaching of those men — “burned thoroughly,” that is diligently trained along that one line and easily fitted together because their views are identical. But God builds with stone. A stone mason must have far more skill than a brick layer, for he must take stones of various shapes and sizes and fit them together. God converts souls of totally different backgrounds, cultures and persuasions, and so works in their souls as to produce a vital spiritual unity among them that is far stronger than any man — devised unity, for they are bonded together by the living Spirit of God. This is unity in diversity, for each one retains his own distinctive character and usefulness: their views are not identical, yet the living power of the Spirit of God overcomes such differences, uniting them in a bond of genuine spiritual unity.

The Babel of this chapter is typical of the New Testament Babylon (Rev 17:1-18; Rev 18:1-24), a great religious system devised by men, though it claims to be “the church.” They have great aspirations, first, “let us build for ourselves a city” (v.4). It is human selfishness that desires “a city,” a great company in which they might boast. Abraham was of a different character: “he waited for the city which has foundations whose builder and maker is God” (Heb 11:10 – NKJV). Faith can wait for God to accomplish what is of lasting value. His city will be one of absolute purity (Rev 21:18) in contrast to the intrigue, violence and corruption that is characteristic of men’s cities.

They propose also “a tower whose top is in the heavens.” This is a great center that will stand out above everything, a symbol of their pride. But the Center of the church of God is the Lord Jesus Christ, who “has become higher than the heavens” (Heb 7:26). The heavens speak of rule and authority (Dan 4:26), and man would like to take this authority into his own incapable hands. But the Lord Jesus is exalted “far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named” (Eph 1:20-21).

The real object of these ambitious builders is expressed plainly in their words, “let us make a name for ourselves.” they want a great name for themselves. But the only One whom God gives a great name is the Lord Jesus Christ. “God also has highly exalted Him and given him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow” (Php 2:9-10). How wonderful therefore is the privilege of the assembly of the living God to be gathered together unto His name (Mat 18:20).

They considered their building to be the means of keeping them from being scattered over the earth, but they defeated their own ends, for because of this God scattered them. He “came down to see the city and the tower which the sons of men had built” (v.5). Of course He could see this without coming down, but His coming down shows the reality of the interest He takes in men’s affairs, intimating that He comes close enough to know all that is involved in what they do. He sees that they are taking advantage of their being united in order to execute their ambitious schemes, in independence of Him Having begun to accomplish such things, nothing would restrain them from whatever imaginative projects came into their minds.

Just as nothing would restrain the builders of the tower of Babel, so today ambitious leaders in the world will be restrained by no barriers. The nations want to share their technology so that they may out do every past generation in their advances in science and every other element of men’s culture. They work hard to overcome all the difficulties of language barriers and of national prejudice, but God continues to work by these things in order to frustrate them. There is constant talk of a one world government, but the great tribulation will prove this to be mere folly. Nations will not co-operate with one another to make this possible. Only when the Lord Jesus takes His throne will this take place, when all shall submit to Him.

The means by which God halted this great undertaking was simple for Him. But it would be a great shock to them to find their languages confused (v.7), some being suddenly unable to understand others, and probably thinking that others had suddenly lost their reason. The world speculates and argues about the origin of languages, but God has settled the matter very simply. All are the result of His great wisdom. Those of the same language would of course be drawn together, and separated from those who spoke different languages. Their city was left unfinished and all were scattered in every direction (v.8).

The name Babel was given to the city afterward, its name meaning “confusion” because of the confusing of languages. The Babylonian empire rose later than this, and many nations (including Judah) had to bow to its authority — typically bowing to the shame of their own confusion because of disobedience to God The New Testament

Babylon (with headquarters at Rome) has caused confusion in the ranks of Christendom, and will be brought down in judgment at the time of the great tribulation, as shown in Rev 17:1-18; Rev 18:1-24.

THE DESCENDANTS OF SHEM

From verse 10 the line of Shem is traced further than in Chapter 10:21-31, which goes as far as Joktan the son of Peleg and stops with his thirteen sons. This genealogy of Chapter 11 continues with Reu the son of Peleg, ignoring Joktan and his sons. The reason is evident, for Reu’s line issues in Nahor, Terah and Abram, and God had purposed Abram to be the father of a chosen race whom He would separate from the rest of the nations. There was to be absolutely no doubt of this though Abraham did not receive the son of God’s promise until he was 100 years of age. God has been careful to trace that line down through the ages, and Mat 1:1-25 begins the New Testament by showing that Christ the Messiah of Israel is the official descendant of Abraham, because He was officially the son of Joseph. The actual line is found in Luk 3:23-38, traced backward from the virgin Mary through Abraham to Adam. The marriage of Joseph and Mary was absolutely essential to accomplish the purpose of God in this matter.

Terah had three sons, Abram, Nahor and Haran, and Haran died before his father did (v.28). Then our interest is focused on Abram and Nahor, who were married to Sarai and Milcah respectively. We shall hear more of Nahor, but much more of Abram, for Nahor is only considered insofar as he is connected with Abram’s history. The brief mention is made here that Sarai had no child.

From Ur of the Chaldees Terah took his son Abram (not Nahor, however) and his grandson Lot, who was the son of his deceased son Haran) and Sarai, Abram’s wife, with the intention of going to the land of Canaan; but they journeyed only as far as Haran (not even crossing the Euphrates River), and stopped there. It may be they named the place after Haran, Lot’s father. Terah died there at the age of 205 years. The reason for their move is seen in Chapter 12.

Fuente: Grant’s Commentary on the Bible

2. The dispersion at Babel 11:1-9

This pericope is a flashback that explains the division of the earth in Peleg’s time (Gen 10:25). The main emphasis in this section is not the building of the tower of Babel but the dispersion of the peoples. We can see this in the literary structure of the passage. [Note: Ross, Creation and . . ., p. 235. Cf. J. P. Fokkelman, Narrative Art in Genesis, p. 22; Wenham, Genesis 1-15, pp. 234-38; and Waltke, Genesis, pp. 176-77.]

A    All the earth had one language (Gen 11:1)

B    there (Gen 11:2)

C    one to another (Gen 11:3)

D    Come, let’s make bricks (Gen 11:3)

E    Let’s make for ourselves (Gen 11:4)

F    a city and a tower

G    And the Lord came down to see (Gen 11:5; cf. Gen 8:1)

F’    the city and the tower (Gen 11:5)

E’    that the humans built (Gen 11:5)

D’    Come, let’s confuse (Gen 11:7)

C’    everyone the language of his neighbor (Gen 11:7)

B’    from there (Gen 11:8)

A’    (confused) the language of the whole earth (Gen 11:9)

When people attempted to preserve their unity and make a name for themselves by building a tower, Yahweh frustrated the plan and scattered everyone by confusing the language that bound them together.

"The tower of Babel story is the last great judgment that befell mankind in primeval times. Its place and function in Genesis 1-11 may be compared to the fall in Genesis 3 and the sons of God episode in Gen 6:1-4, both of which triggered divine judgments of great and enduring consequence." [Note: Wenham, Genesis 1-15, p. 242.]

This story explains to God’s people how God scattered the nations and why. In judgment for trying to establish a world state in opposition to divine rule (human government run amuck), God struck the thing that bound people together, namely, a common language. Chronologically the Babel incident preceded the dispersal that Moses described with genealogies in chapter 10. One writer argued for the identification of the tower of Babel incident with the demise and dispersion of the last great Sumerian dynasty centered at Ur. [Note: Paul T. Penley, "A Historical Reading of Genesis 11:1-9: The Sumerian Demise and Dispersion under the Ur III Dynasty," Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 50:4 (December 2007):693-714.]

"By placing the Tower of Babel incident just prior to the patriarchal stories, the biblical writer is suggesting, in the first place, that post-Flood humanity is as iniquitous as pre-Flood humanity. Rather than sending something as devastating as a flood to annihilate mankind, however, God now places his hope in a covenant with Abraham as a powerful solution to humanity’s sinfulness. Thus problem (ch. 11) and solution (ch. 12) are brought into immediate juxtaposition, and the forcefulness of this structural move would have been lost had ch. 10 intervened between the two." [Note: Hamilton, pp. 347-48. See J. Sasson, "The ’Tower of Babel’ As a Clue to the Redactional Structuring of the Primeval History [Genesis 1-11:9]," in The Bible World: Essays in Honor of Cyrus H. Gordon, pp. 218-19.]

"As it is presently situated in the text, the account of the founding of Babylon falls at the end of the list of fourteen names from the line of Joktan (Gen 10:26-29). At the end of the list of the ten names of Peleg’s line, however, is the account of the call of Abraham (Gen 11:27 to Gen 12:10). So two great lines of the descendants of Shem divide in the two sons of Eber (Gen 10:25). One ends in Babylon, the other in the Promised Land." [Note: Sailhamer, The Pentateuch . . ., p. 134.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Some of the Hamites migrated "east" (specifically southeast) to the plain of Shinar (cf. Gen 10:10). This was in the Mesopotamian basin (modern Iraq).

"In light of such intentional uses of the notion of ’eastward’ within the Genesis narratives, we can see that here too the author intentionally draws the story of the founding of Babylon into the larger scheme at work throughout the book. It is a scheme that contrasts God’s way of blessing (e.g., Eden and the Promised Land) with man’s own attempt to find the ’good.’ In the Genesis narratives, when man goes ’east,’ he leaves the land of blessing (Eden and the Promised Land) and goes to a land where the greatest of his hopes will turn to ruin (Babylon and Sodom). [Note: Idem, "Genesis," p. 104.]

 

"Following the Ararat departure, the people migrated southeast to the lower Euphrates valley. Genesis 1-11 then has come full circle from ’Eden’ to ’Babel,’ both remembered for the expulsion of their residents." [Note: Mathews, p. 467.]

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)