Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.
7. Go to, let us go down ] For 1st pers. plur. see notes on Gen 1:26, Gen 3:5; Gen 3:22. Jehovah is represented probably as enthroned above the heaven, and either as addressing the powers of heaven, “the sons of Elohim,” who attend Him and minister to Him (cf. Job 1:6), or as announcing His purpose in the deliberative 1st pers. plur.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 7. Go to] A form of speech which, whatever it might have signified formerly, now means nothing. The Hebrew habah signifies come, make preparation, as it were for a journey, the execution of a purpose, c. Almost all the versions understand the word in this way the Septuagint have , the Vulgate venite, both signifying come, or come ye. This makes a very good sense, Come, let its go down, &c. For the meaning of these latter words see Ge 1:26, and Ge 18:21.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Let us, i.e. the blessed Trinity. See Gen 1:26.
Confound their language, by making them forget their former language, and by putting into their minds several languages; not a distinct language into each person, but into each family, or rather into each nation; that thereby they may be disenabled from that mutual commerce which was altogether necessary for the carrying on of that work.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
7. confound theirlanguageliterally, “their lip”; it was a failure inutterance, occasioning a difference in dialect which was intelligibleonly to those of the same tribe. Thus easily by God their purpose wasdefeated, and they were compelled to the dispersion they had combinedto prevent. It is only from the Scriptures we learn the true originof the different nations and languages of the world. By one miracleof tongues men were dispersed and gradually fell from true religion.By another, national barriers were broken downthat all men mightbe brought back to the family of God.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Go to, let us go down, [and] there confound their language,…. These words are not spoken to the angels, as the Targum and Aben Ezra; for, as Philo the Jew observes h, they are said to some as co-workers with God, which angels could not be in this work of confounding the language of men; it being above the power of creatures so to work upon the mind, and on the faculty of speech, as to make such an alteration as was at the confusion of tongues, when men were made to forget their former language, and had another put into their minds, and a faculty of speaking it given; or, however, the first language was so differently inflected and pronounced, that it seemed another, and various; all which could not be done but by him who is almighty, even that Jehovah, Father, Son, and Spirit, said Ge 11:8 to confound man’s language; and the first of these speaks to the other two, with whom he consulted about doing it, and with whom he did it. Not that every man had a new and distinct language given him, for then there could have been no society and converse in the world, but one was given to each family; or rather to as many families as constituted a nation or colony, designed for the same place of habitation; how many there were, cannot be said with any certainty. Euphorus, and many other historians i, say they were seventy five, according to the number of Jacob’s posterity that went down into Egypt; others say seventy two: the Jewish writers generally agree with the Targum of Jonathan in making them seventy, according to the number of the posterity of Noah’s sons, recorded in the preceding chapter; but several of them spoke the same language, as Ashur, Arphaxad, and Aram, spoke the Chaldee or Syriac language; the sons of Canaan one and the same language; and the thirteen sons of Joktan the Arabic language; Javari and Elisha the Greek language; so that, as Bochart k observes, scarce thirty of the seventy will remain distinct: and it is an observation of Dr. Lightfoot l not to be despised, that
“the fifteen named in Ac 2:5 were enough to confound the work (at Babel), and they may very well be supposed to have been the whole number.”
The end to be answered it was,
that they may not understand one another’s speech; or “hear” m, that is, so as to understand; the words were so changed, and so differently pronounced from what they had used to hear, that though they heard the sound, they could not tell the meaning of them: hence, as Jarchi observes, when one asked for a brick, another brought him clay or slime, on which he rose up against him, and dashed his brains out.
h De Confus. Ling. p. 344. i Apud Clement. Alexandr. Strom. l. 1. p. 338. k Phaleg. l. 1. c. 15. col. 55. l See his Works, vol. 1. p. 694. m “audiant”, Pagninus, Montanus, &c.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
7. Go to, let us go down. We have said that Moses has represented the case to us by the figure hypotyposis, (330) that the judgments of God may be the more clearly illustrated. For which reason, he now introduces God as the speaker, who declares that the work which they supposed could not be retarded, shall, without any difficulty, be destroyed. The meaning of the words is of this kind, ‘I will not use many instruments, I will only blow upon them, and they, through the confusion of tongues, shall be contemptibly scattered. And as they, having collected a numerous band, were contriving how they might reach the clouds; so on the other hand, God summons his troops, by whose interposition he may ward off their fury. It is, however, asked, what troops he intends? The Jews think that he addresses himself to the angels. But since no mention is made of the angels, and God places those to whom he speaks in the same rank with himself, this exposition is harsh, and deservedly rejected. This passage rather answers to the former, which occurs in the account of man’s creation, when the Lord said, “Let us make man after our image.” For God aptly and wisely opposes his own eternal wisdom and power to this great multitude; as if he had said, that he had no need of foreign auxiliaries, but possessed within himself what would suffice for their destruction. Wherefore, this passage is not improperly adduced in proof that Three Persons subsist in One Essence of Deity. Moreover, this example of Divine vengeance belongs to all ages: for men are always inflamed with the desire of daring to attempt what is unlawful. And this history shows that God will ever be adverse to such counsels and designs; so that we here behold, depicted before our eyes what Solomon says:
‘
There is no counsel, nor prudence, nor strength against the Lord,’ (Pro 21:30.)
Unless the blessing of God be present, from which alone we may expect a prosperous issue, all that we attempt will necessarily perish. Since, then, God declares that he is at perpetual war with the unmeasured audacity of men; anything we undertake without his approval will end miserably, even though all creatures above and beneath should earnestly offer us their assistance. Now, although the world bears this curse to the present day; yet, in the midst of punishment, and of the most dreadful proofs of Divine anger against the pride of men, the admirable goodness of God is rendered conspicuous, because the nations hold mutual communication among themselves, though in different languages; but especially because He has proclaimed one gospel, in all languages, through the whole world, and has endued the Apostles with the gift of tongues. Whence it has come to pass, that they who before were miserably divided, have coalesced in the unity of the faith. In this sense Isaiah says, that the language of Canaan should be common to all under the reign of Christ, (Isa 19:18😉 because, although their language may differ in sound, they all speak the same thing, while they cry, Abba, Father.
(330) Hypotyposis, in rhetoric, a figure whereby a thing is described, or painted in such vivid colouring, that it seems to stand before the eyes, and to be visible or tangible, rather than the subject of writing, or of discourse. — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
7. Let us confound their language The solemn deliberation and decision of the Triune God is mysteriously intimated in this language . See note on Gen 1:1; Gen 1:26. So in the miracle of the Pentecost, which fore-shadowed the restoration of the unity shattered at Babel, CHRIST, at the right hand of the FATHER exalted, shed forth the SPIRIT upon the multitude from “every nation under heaven,” that is, representatives of the whole race.
The language of this verse certainly implies a sudden and miraculous, rather than a gradual and providential, action in the modification of human speech. The mode of such a miracle, as of all miracles, is, of course, inexplicable, for explanation is simply reference to some natural law, and where a miracle is concerned, causes above nature come into action. But the probable character of the miracle may be seen from considering the nature of language. All language, as shown above, can be reduced to some four or five hundred verbal roots, or consonantal combinations for in the power to produce consonants man’s vocal organs differ essentially from those of brutes and it was made natural, or instinctive, at creation, for man to produce these sounds to express the elementary ideas, (for example, to produce the sound st to denote fixedness, firmness, etc., as in stand, sto, , see also on Gen 11:1,) just as the dove instinctively coos and the cock crows to express certain emotions . These roots furnished man’s primary outfit, from which, by manifold modifications, he has developed language . Originally these modifications, to express action, passion, time, manner of action, (voice, mood, tense, etc . ,) were the same for all men; but now each family of languages has its own peculiar way of expressing them . The Shemitic family conveys these ideas mainly by internal modifications, interposing sounds between the root letters, the Aryan by external modifications, prefixes, and affixes . This may help us understand where the miraculous stroke fell on human nature at the Babel catastrophe, and thus was the “ lip,” the manner of expression, not the essential matter, changed . Historical and geographical philology furnish a most remarkable confirmation of the miracle of Babel . The fixedness and generic persistency of the great linguistic types point to a violent cleavage and projection asunder in the remotest past. The Finnish was in Northern Europe before the Celts arrived, and there it still is. It may perish, but it will never change to Slavonic. The Gaelic survives in a few patches of the British Islands, dwindling slowly away, but while it lives it will ever be Gaelic, it cannot develop into English. It is many centuries since the Shemitic, stretching through the Euphrates valley and the Arabian peninsula, clove the Aryan district asunder. But, as in the days of Solomon, the Sanscrit lay on the east and the Pelasgic on the west of the Hebrew, so to-day the same Sanscrit and its children live in the Indian peninsula, and the children of the Greek and Latin and Teutonic flourish in Europe, while the Arabic, in all its Shemitic integrity, lies between, neither family mingling with the other. (See Lewis, Excursus on Genesis 11 .)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Gen 11:7. Let us go down, &c. God is said to go down, when he executes any work upon earth, which makes his power and presence signally known. The plural us is another proof of the sacred doctrine of the Trinity. See note on ch. Gen 1:26.
And there confound their language If this word (language) in the first verse, imports not only speech, but sentiment, the confusion here occasioned by the Lord among them, must have been in both. He not only occasioned a confusion and dissension of sentiment among them, but also a confusion in their language or speech, insomuch that one man was not able to understand what another said. We have no business to examine into the manner how this might be occasioned, when we consider, that it was the immediate work of God; who, doubtless, by a thousand means could have effected this end: nor does there appear more difficulty in occasioning such a confusion in language, or pronunciation, than of giving the power of speaking all languages to men utterly unskilled in them. See Acts 2. Certain however it is, that the confusion produced the end designed by the Lord, and brought on that dispersion and division of mankind, which was a natural consequence of division either in language or sentiment: those who understood the same language, and were of the same sentiments, naturally uniting together. So the earth came to be peopled; these men gradually separating, most probably by joint consent, and the generality of them leaving the city and tower they had begun to build, which, from that event, was called Babel, or confusion: and thus did the Lord scatter or disperse them over all the earth; that is, by means of this event, he caused them to be dispersed; the scripture frequently applying that directly to God, which is only the consequence of his agency.
It has been inquired, in what the crime of these builders at Babel more especially consisted? In answer to which, let the reader consider what hath been said of their attempt, in the note on Act 2:4. And it will also appear, that, by this scheme, a great part of the earth would have been for a long time uninhabited, uncultivated, and over-run with wild beasts. But, most probably, the bad effects which this project would have had upon the minds, the morals, and the religion of mankind, was the chief reason why God interposed to crush it as soon as it was formed. It had manifestly a direct tendency to tyranny, oppression, and slavery; whereas, in forming several independent governments, by a small body of men, the ends of government, and the security of liberty and property, would be much better attended to, and more firmly established; which, in fact, was generally the case. Corruption may creep into religion under any constitution; but tyranny and despotic power is the readier and surest way to deprive men of the use of understanding and conscience: and vice and idolatry would have spread much faster, had the whole world, in one body, been under the absolute dominion of vicious, insolent, and idolatrous monarchs. This would have been a state of things just in the opposite extreme of the ante-diluvian licentiousness, and would have been nearly as pernicious to all morality and religion, as it must have sunk mankind into the basest servility of soul, and have stocked the earth with a mean-spirited race of mortals, who durst not open their own eyes, make any generous use of their own faculties, or relish the bounties of heaven with pleasure and thankfulness.
For these wise and beneficent reasons, I presume, the Divine Providence interposed, and baffled the project, (which, in the then circumstances of the projectors, would otherwise have been unhappily successful,) by confounding their language in such a manner, as that they could not understand one another. Thus the contagion of wickedness, for some time at least, had bounds set to it; evil example was confined, and could not stretch its influence beyond the limits of one country: nor could wicked projects be carried on with universal concurrence by many little colonies, separated by the natural boundaries of mountains, rivers, and deserts, and hindered from associating together by a variety of languages, unintelligible to each other. And further, in this dispersed state, they would, whenever God pleased, be made checks reciprocally upon each other by invasions and wars; which would weaken the power and humble the pride of corrupt and vicious communities. This dispensation, therefore, was properly calculated to prevent a second universal degeneracy; God therein dealing with men as rational agents, and suiting his designs to their present state and circumstances. This dispersion probably happened about two hundred and forty years after the flood.
REFLECTIONS.We have here, 1. The name God gives these mighty workers, the children of men. Observe, (1.) They are children of vanity; foolish in their designs, and weak in their efforts against God. (2.) They are children of corruption, wicked as well as weak; and therefore obnoxious, in their state of degeneracy, to the divine displeasure.
2. God’s resolution to confound their enterprize. He beheld their pride, but he is able to abase them. When the wicked say, “Let us cast off his bands, and break his cords from us,” they are but forging their own chains. God mocks at the impotent attempt, and will make it appear as foolish as it is impious.
3. The method God took: he confounded their language; a method perfectly effectual to prevent their design: they could no longer join in counsel, nor obey command. Whenever he pleaseth, he can as easily disappoint the devices of the wicked, as he now divided their tongues. It was a mercy he visited them no farther: had he said, Let us go down, and consume them utterly, he had been righteous; but he mingles mercy with judgment in this world: it is in the next, where the impenitent will have judgment without mercy.
4. The effect produced: they left off to build. It is high time to have done, when God stands against us.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.
Observe the form of expression, let us go down; and recollect what was remarked in the Commentary on Gen 1:26 . (See POOR on “Gen 1:26 “)
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Gen 11:7 Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.
Ver. 7. Go to, let us go down. ] “Go to,” say they: “Go to,” saith He. “Let us build to heaven,” say they: “Let us go down and see it,” saith He. “Let us make us a name,” say they: “Let us confound their language, that they may not so much as know their own names,” saith He. “Lest we be scattered,” say they: “Let us scatter them abroad the world,” saith He. Thus God words it with them, and confutes their folly from point to point. Thus he sets himself in battle array against the proud, as St James has it, , Jam 4:7 and overthrows them in plain field. He dealt more severely with David for numbering the people than for the matter of Uriah. He turned Nebuchadnezzar grazing among beasts, for pruning and priding himself upon this Babel. “Is not this great Babel, that I have built?” Why, no; Nimrod built it, and Ninus, and Semiramis: Nebuchadnezzar only beautified it, or, at utmost, enlarged it. But pride detracts from God and man, and is therefore justly hated and scorned of both.
And there confound their language.
“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.” – Dubartus.
Neither is there any better understanding and agreement among the Babel builders at this day ( Babylon enim altera, nempe propinquior atque recentior adhuc stat, cito itidem casura, si essetis viri , said Petrarch long since); witness their many sects and deadly dissensions among themselves, of which read the “Peace of Rome,” “Rhemes against Rome,” a and various other English treatises to the same purpose. Bellarmine teaches, that the bread in the sacrament is not turned into Christ’s body productive, but adductive. And this, saith he, is the opinion of the Church of Rome. This Suarez denies, and saith, it is not the Church’s opinion. b Thus these great master-builders are confounded in their language, and understand not their own mother. The greatest clerks among them cannot yet determine how the saints know our hearts and prayers – whether by hearing or seeing, or presence everywhere, or by God’s relating or revealing men’s prayers and needs unto them. All which ways some of them hold as possible or probable; and others deny and confute them as untrue. c Alsted calls Baronius’s “Annals” the Tower of Babel. And another saith, Baronius doth not write annals, but maketh them. How he takes up St Paul for reproving Peter at Antioch, and contradicts the Holy Ghost, is well known; as also how he thunders against the king of Spain, his sovereign, concerning the kingdom of Sicily; for the which rudeness, when he was reprehended by another cardinal, he thus defended himself: An imperious zeal hath no power to spare, no, not God himself. Was not this an apology well befitting a Babel builder? Christchurch, in Oxford, like the tower of Babel, saith one, began with such stupendous magnificence, under the pride of Wolsey (another cardinal of the Church of Rome), who resolved to make it a work of wonder, that the Controller of men’s actions determined to make it a work of confusion; and so, when the cardinal fell, the walls had fallen too, had not Henry VIII. looked graciously upon it, to set it up, to some purpose. d
a De Rom. utriusque Fort. Dial. , 118.
b Cade Of the Church , 247.
c Morton’s Appeal, lib. ii. cap. 12, sec. 5.
d Gainsf. Glor. of England.
Go to, let Us go down. This is always in judgment (Compare Gen 18:21. Exo 3:8). Here in contrast with Gen 11:4, to man’s “Go to, let us go up”. Figure of speech Anthropopatheia, App-6. See Gen 11:5.
Go to: The Hebrew word signifies, “Come,” or, “make preparation,” as for a journey or the execution of a purpose.
let: Gen 11:5, Gen 1:26, Gen 3:22, Isa 6:8
confound: Job 5:12, Job 5:13, Job 12:20, Psa 2:4, Psa 33:10, Act 2:4-11
may: Gen 10:5, Gen 10:20, Gen 10:32, Gen 42:23, Deu 28:49, Psa 55:9, Jer 5:15, 1Co 14:2-11, 1Co 14:23
Reciprocal: Gen 11:3 – they said one to another Gen 18:21 – I will go down Exo 3:8 – I am 2Ki 5:5 – go Ecc 2:1 – Go to Isa 5:5 – go to Jer 18:11 – go to Joh 14:23 – make Act 7:34 – and am Jam 4:13 – Go to
11:7 Go to, {h} let us go down, and {i} there confound their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech.
(h) He speaks as though he took counsel with his own wisdom and power: that is, with the Son and holy Spirit: signifying the greatness and certainty of the punishment.
(i) By this great plague of the confusion of tongues appears God’s horrible judgment against man’s pride and vain glory.
God’s soliloquy in this verse mimics the language of the tower builders in Gen 11:3-4 (cf. Gen 1:26). The tower was so puny that He had to come down to see it (cf. Isa 40:22). The confusion of language probably involved more than just the introduction of new words.
"If language is the audible expression of emotions, conceptions, and thoughts of the mind, the cause of the confusion or division of the one human language into different national dialects might be sought in an effect produced upon the human mind, by which the original unity of emotion, conception, thought, and will was broken up. This inward unity had no doubt been already disturbed by sin, but the disturbance had not yet amounted to a perfect breach." [Note: Keil and Delitzsch, 1:174-75.]
Some scholars believe that this judgment also involved the implantation of ethnic and racial distinctions in humankind. The Table of Nations in chapter 10 may imply this. [Note: See Merrill, "The Peoples . . .," p. 22.]
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)