Gênesis 11
John Piper · Citado em PreceptAustin
Gênesis 11
Piper - A Perplexing Matter Answered. Let’s begin by clarifying one perplexing matter of context. Genesis 11:1–9 seems to describe the origin of languages. But careful readers of Genesis notice that in chapter 10 the peoples and languages are described already before the tower of Babel in Genesis 11. For example, look at Genesis 10:5: “The coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations.” Then you get to Genesis 11:1 and it says, “Now the whole earth had one language and the same words.” The author knew what he was doing. He has not forgotten in Ge 11:1 what he just wrote in Ge 10:5, 20, and 31 (just two verses earlier). The solution is to recognize that the author has not put these two stories in chronological order. He first describes the spread of the peoples and languages in chapter 10 and then he describes the origin of that diversity in Genesis 11:1–9. Sometimes, when you have something shocking to say about why an event happens, you put it at the beginning of the event, and sometimes you wait and put it at the end of the event. After the flood God had said to Noah in Genesis 9:1, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.” That’s what chapter 10 describes. It was happening as peoples and languages multiplied. It looked like a simple fulfillment of God’s command. It looked like obedience. Then Genesis 11:1–9 drops the bomb on us. It wasn’t obedience. They weren’t spreading. They were clustering. God came down and shattered their disobedience and made their clustering impossible. He confused their language and broke humanity into many peoples and languages. (Full sermon The Pride of Babel and the Praise of Christ) Griffith Thomas: This is an example of the characteristic, already mentioned, of dealing with collateral branches first, and only after that considering the main stream in the descendants of Shem.. . . This table of nations show their kinship with the chosen race, out of which all spiritual blessing is to become. Then the nations are dismissed from the Scripture record, and attention concentrated on the Semitic line. (Genesis 11:1-9 The Tower of Babel) Ray Pritchard - Background to Help Understand Genesis 11 - In order to understand this story, there are a few background facts we need to know. First, the story of the Tower of Babel occurred just a few generations after Noah’s flood. It may have happened 100-150 years later. By this time the population of the world had expanded considerably from just eight people to a much larger number. One writer suggests that there were more than 30,000 people living on earth at the time. Second, in those days everyone spoke the same language. That fact (mentioned in verse 1) is crucial to understanding this passage of Scripture. The human race was united then in a way that has never been repeated since then. A careful student of Scripture may wonder how the whole world could speak one language in Genesis 11 when Genesis 10 specifies that the whole earth was divided into competing tribes and nations, each with its own language or dialect. The answer is that Moses has flip-flopped the narrative in order to highlight the essential problem of the human race. Chronologically, the Tower of Babel story comes before the scattering of the nations in Genesis 10. But Moses reversed the order to emphasize the high cost of rebelling against God. We are supposed to come to the end of Genesis 10 and ask, “How did the world become so hopelessly divided?” Genesis 11 answers that question. Third, most people lived in the Middle East, in an area called Shinar, which is another name for Babylonia, which is in the region of modern-day Iraq. As the post-flood generations migrated east from Ararat, they settled in the region we now call the “fertile crescent,” a well-watered plain near the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. Fourth, the tower they built was religious in nature. This fact might not be evident from a quick reading of the text. When this passage is taught in Sunday School, teachers sometimes imply that the people were trying to build a tower all the way to heaven. That’s probably not accurate. It seems more likely that they were building a tower that would bring heaven down to earth. Some writers suggest that the tower was tied to the early development of astrology. They suggest that at the top of the tower was an altar surrounded by the signs of the zodiac, making it an enormous symbol of man’s attempt to control the universe apart from God. This suggestion seems likely since we know that astrology originated in ancient Babylon. (The Tower That Fell: Why God Stopped the Building Program) Rod Mattoon - UNITY IN THE COMMUNITY-Ge 11:1 This chapter completes a pattern of broken relationships. • Chapter Three-A husband from the wife. • Chapter Four-A brother from a brother. • Chapter Nine-Children from parents. • Chapter Eleven-People from other people. Broken fellowship with others can be attributed by a broken relationship with the Lord. As the curtain opens in chapter eleven, we see the earth is of one language and speech. There was unity in communication. Communication is the key to reaching goals on a team effort level. Good teams, good marriages, good churches and businesses communicate effectively. When communication breaks down, commitment is destroyed or weakened. Problems in an organization or in a marriage fall into three key categories. • Commitment is lacking in order to work on clearly defined goals. • Closeness and Concord is lacking between individuals. • Communication is lacking. The men of Babel had a successful organization going before God intervened. This chapter reveals four key ingredients to develop a successful organization. • Commitment to work on a goal. 11:3, 4 • Closeness among the people. 11:6 • A Communication system that was very effective. 11:1, 6 • Compliance to the will of God. 11:7-9 These verses reveal that they were disobedient in this area. This is why God intervened. Similar principles of success and unity are found in Joshua 1:16-18. • Cooperation-We will do. 11:16 • Compliance-We will go. 11:16 • Commitment-We will obey 11:17 • Constancy-Anyone who rebels will be put to death. 11:18 • Cheering-Be strong and courageous. 11:18 (Treasures from Genesis) Excerpt from - The Dispersion of the Nations in Genesis 11:1–9 Allen P. Ross (CLICK HERE FOR FULL ARTICLE) Introduction to the Passage THE NATURE OF THE ACCOUNT The narrative in Genesis 11:1–9 describes the divine intervention among the human family to scatter them across the face of the earth by means of striking at the heart of their unity—their language. A quick reading of the passage shows that the predominant idea is not the tower of Babel but this scattering. If the point is not simply the tower, then this passage does not present, as some have suggested, a Hebrew adaptation of the Greek Titans storming heaven to dislodge God. Rather, the characteristics of the people in this story are anxiety and pride through their own gregariousness. (1) The tower, on the one hand, is born from the people’s fear of being scattered across the earth; and on the other hand it is an attempt to frustrate God’s plan to fill the earth (Gen. 9:1). The sin. Since the story has the trappings of a judgment narrative in which Yahweh interrupts mankind’s misguided activities and scatters them abroad, it may be assumed that the antithesis of this scattering must be the sin. The major error was not the building of a city, but the attempt of the race to live in one city. (2) Therefore it appears that the human family was striving for unity, security, and social immortality (making a name) in defiance of God’s desire for them to fill the earth. Divine punishment. It is important to keep in mind that the “judgment” was not the destruction of the city but of the language that united the people. It was shattered into a multiplicity of languages so that the common bond was destroyed. (3) Thus the text is demonstrating that the present number of languages that form national barriers is a monument to sin. Divine prevention. Since the people’s purpose was to make a name for themselves and to achieve power through unity, the apostasy of the human spirit would shortly bring the race to the brink of another catastrophe such as the Deluge. By frustrating their communication and dividing them into nations, it is evident that “it is the will of God, so long as sin is present in the world, to employ nationalism in the reduction of sin.” (4) For ages people have restricted themselves to native manners and customs and regarded diverse languages of foreigners with great horror. (5) Thus Israel was delivered from a people of “a strange language” (Ps. 114:1) and was frequently warned of destruction by a fierce nation whose language would not be understood and whose deep speech could not be comprehended (Deut. 28:49; Isa. 28:11; 33:19; Jer. 5:15). The language barrier brought sudden fear and prevented unification. Ringgren summarized the twofold aspect of Yahweh’s intervention in Genesis 11 as divine reaction to pride. Theologically, the building of the tower in Gen. 11 is interpreted as an act of human arrogance and rebellion against God; accordingly, Yahweh intervenes against its builders and scatters them over the whole earth. This action of God is both punishment and a preventive measure; it prevents men from going too far in their pride. (6) Later prophets would draw on this narrative, recording the very beginnings of the divisions as they looked to the end of days when God Himself would unify mankind once again. Zephaniah 3:9–11 appears to be constructed antithetically to this passage with its themes in common with Genesis 11:1–9: the pure speech (i.e., one language), (7) the gathering of the dispersed people (even from Cush), (8) the removal of pride, and the service in the holy mountain. The miracle on the day of Pentecost is often seen as a harbinger of that end time. (9)...... SETTING FOR THE PASSAGE The Babylonian background. That this passage has Babylon in mind is clear from the explication of the name “Babel” in Ge 11: 9. The first time this term was used was in the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 where the beginning of the kingdom was recorded in the exploits of Nimrod from Cush (Ge 10:10). Not only is there this direct reference to proud Babylon, but also other evidences show that the background of the story was Mesopotamian. Speiser says, “The episode points more concretely to Babylonia than does any other portion of primeval history and the background that is here sketched proves to be authentic beyond all expectations.”(16) Babylon was a thing of beauty to the pagan world. Every important city of Babylonia was built with a step-tower known as a ziggurat (ziggurratu).(17) In Nebuchadnezzar’s Babylon itself, in the area of Marduk’s sanctuary known as E-sag-ila, “the house whose head is raised up,” (18) there was a seven-storied tower with a temple top that was known as E-temen-anki. This structure, measuring 90 meters by 90 meters at the base as well as being 90 meters high, became one of the wonders of the world. (19) The tower was a symbol of Babylonian culture and played a major role in other cultures influenced by it. (20) The first of such towers must be earlier than Nebuchadnezzar’s, for his were rebuildings of ancient patterns. Cassuto maintains that this reference must be to E-temen-anki (although he suggests that the occasion for the tradition giving rise to the satire would come from an earlier time, from the Hittite destruction of Babylon). (21) Speiser does not agree. He points out that it cannot be E-temen-anki, which cannot antedate the seventh century. Therefore this account must be centuries earlier than E-temen-anki. (22) Since Esarhaddon (seventh century) and Nebuchadnezzar (sixth century) were the first since Hammurabi to build such works, the biblical reference in Genesis 11 must be to a much earlier Babylon. So while the actual Neo-Babylonian Empire’s (23) architecture cannot be the inspiration for this account, one must conclude that their buildings were rebuildings of some ancient tower located in the same area. But when the literary parallels concerning this architecture are considered, some very significant correspondences to the narrative are noted. First, there is a specific connection of this story with the account of the building of Babylon, recorded in the Akkadian Enuma Elish, tablet VI, lines 55–64: When Marduk heard this, Brightly glowed his features, like the days: “Like that of lofty Babylon, whose building you have requested, Let its brickwork be fashioned. You shall name it the sanctuary.” The Anunnaki applied the implement; For one year they molded bricks. When the second year arrived, They raised high the head of Esagila equaling Apsu. Having built a stage tower as high as Apsu, They set up in it an abode for Marduk, Enlil, Ea; In their presence he adorned it with grandeur. (24) Within this passage are several literary parallels to the biblical narrative. Line 62 reads, “They raised the head of Esagila mih̬rit apsî,” (ša Esagila mih̬rit apsî ullū rēšī [šu]). Speiser notes the word play of ullū rēšīšû with Esagila, which means “the structure which raises the head,” explaining that it evokes a special value for the Sumerian name, giving it a significant meaning in Babylon. (25) Thus he concludes that rēšam ullûm became a stock expression for the monumental structures of Babylon and Assyria. Speiser shows that apsû is a reference to the heavens. He allows that it often means “the deep,” but that cannot be correct in the light of line 63 which says, “when they had built the temple tower of the upper (elīte) apsu” (ibnūma ziggurat ša apsî elīte). In line 62 then, miḫrit apsî must be “toward heaven,” and apsu must be celestial and not subterranean. (26) A second important element is the bricks. The Hebrew text in Genesis 11:3 describes the brickmaking with a cognate accusative construction. Once the bricks are made, the tower is made. Speiser observes that the bricks figured predominantly in the Babylonian account where there is a year-long brick ritual. (27) The Babylonian account not only records a similar two-step process (making bricks in the first year and raising the tower head in the second), but it also has a similar construction, using a cognate accusative, libittasu iltabnū (Hebrew: נִלְבְּנָה לְבֵנִים). In fact, the Hebrew and Akkadian words are cognate. The similarity is striking. So in Enuma Elish and Genesis there are at least three solid literary connections: the making of the tower for the sanctuary of the gods, with Genesis reporting the determination to build the tower and city in rebellion to God; the lofty elevation of its head into the heavens, with Genesis recording almost the same reference; and the making of the bricks before the building of the city, with Genesis describing the process with the same grammatical construction. Another correspondence is reflected in the great pride of the builders. One of the purposes of the Babylonian creation epic at its composition was to show the preeminence of Babylon over all the cities of the country, and especially the supremacy of Marduk over all deities. They were so pleased with themselves that they considered Babylon to be a celestial city, prepared by the Anunnaki gods and made for Marduk on behalf of his victory over Tiamat. It then became the pattern for the earthly city (Enuma Elish, tablet VI, lines 113–15). In fact Babylon, that metropolitan city for so many peoples, claimed to be the origination of society, their city having descended from heaven. (28) Herein is the immense pride of Babylon. Therefore with this world-famous city and tower culture claiming to be the heavenly plan and beginning of creation, the record in Genesis 11 is a counterblast and a polemic. (29) To communicate this most forcefully, the text employs literary elements of that ancient, traditional theme preserved in the Babylonian culture, but the contents and thrust of the message differ remarkably. (30) The differences are pointed out in part by Vos. (31) First, Genesis implies that nothing like this had ever been built before by man, but the ziggurats represent traditional workings. Second, Genesis presents the building as evidence of their disobedience, but the Babylonian work was for the purpose of worshiping a local deity. Third, Genesis describes this as the work of one united race of people that became the basis of the scattering and confusion into languages and tribes, but the ziggurats were man-made mountains of a national group (their towers were the symbol of their culture). Also these towers developed gradually over the centuries after the diffusion and scattering. So Genesis, in setting forth the account of the divine intervention at Babel in the ancient past, deliberately alludes to the arrogance of Babylon that was represented in their literature. The result is a satire on the thing of glory and beauty of the pagan world. The biblical writer, having become familiar with the vainglorious words in the traditions of Babylon, weaves his account for the purpose of deriding the literary traditions of that ancient city and establishing the truth. In fact traditions from Mesopotamia recorded the ancient division of languages as well. The Sumerians had recorded that there was originally one language since everyone came to worship Enlil with one tongue (Enmerkar Epic, lines 141–46). (32) Cassuto suggests a collection of satirical ideas that would have given rise to the Genesis narrative, and he paraphrases them as follows: You children of Babylon … you called your city Babel—Bâbili, “Gate of god,” or Bâb-ilani, “Gate of gods”—and your tower you designated “House of the foundation of heaven and earth.” You desired that the top of your tower should be in heaven.… You did not understand that, even if you were to raise the summit of your ziggurat ever so high, you would not be nearer to Him than when you stand upon the ground; nor did you comprehend that He who in truth dwells in heaven, if he wishes to take a closer look at your lofty tower, must needs come down.… Your intention was to build for yourselves a gigantic city that would contain all mankind and you forgot that it was God’s will to fill the whole earth with human settlements, and that God’s plan would surely be realized.… You were proud of your power, but you should have known that it is forbidden to man to exalt himself, for only the Lord is truly exalted, and the pride of man is regarded by Him as iniquity that leads to his downfall and degradation—a punishment befitting the crime.… On account of this, your dominion was shattered and your families were scattered over the face of the whole earth. Behold, how fitting is the name that you have given to your city! It is true that in your language it expresses glory and pride, but in our idiom it sounds as though it connoted confusion—and confusion of tongues heard therein, which caused its destruction and the dispersion of its inhabitants in every direction. (33) Babylon was the prototype of all nations, cities, and empires that despise God’s instructions and raise themselves in pride (ED: THUS IT SHOULD NOT SURPRISE US THAT THE TERM "BABYLON*" OCCURS 298x in 264 VERSES!). (34) Babylon represented man’s megalomaniacal attempt to achieve world peace and unity by domestic exploitation and power. They would be brought down in confusion; herein was the warning to the new nation of Israel: any disobedient nation would be abased and brought low in spite of her pride, ingenuity, and strength. The “Babylon” motif became the common representation for the anti-theocratical program. Later writers drew on this theme and used the name as a symbol for the godless society with its great pretensions. Isaiah 47:8–13 portrayed Babylon’s pleasures, sins, and superstitions. Isaiah 13:19 pictured her as “the glory of kingdoms, the beauty of the Chaldeans’ pride”; and Isaiah 14:13 describes her sinful arrogance in exalting her throne above the Most High in the heavens only to be brought low. Jeremiah also predicted the cup of vengeance on this arrogant city (Jer. 51). Daniel recorded her persecutions against Judah. And Revelation 17–18 applies the theme to the spiritual Babylon in the eschaton (ED: I BELIEVE THIS FUTURE BABYLON WILL BE LITERAL WITH A SPIRITUAL INFLUENCE OVER THE ENTIRE WORLD - SEE COMMENTARY), showing that it was her sins that reached heaven and brought the catastrophe to her, thus preparing the way for the true celestial city to come down to earth. (35) The setting in the primeval narratives. The present story of the scattering is part of the primeval events of Genesis which give a picture of man in open rebellion to God and of God intervening in judgment on each situation. (36) The scattering of the race from Babel forms the capstone to the primeval history of the human race. (37) This development of mankind is accurately described by Kidner. The primeval history reaches its fruitless climax as man, conscious of new abilities, prepares to glorify and fortify himself by collective effort. The elements of the story are timelessly characteristic of the spirit of the world. The project is typically grandiose; men describe it excitedly to one another as if it were the ultimate achievement—very much as modern man glories in his space projects. At the same time they betray their insecurity as they crowd together to preserve their identity and control their fortunes. (38) So it is with this story that the common history of all mankind comes to an abrupt end, which leaves the human race hopelessly scattered across the face of the entire earth. It is this that makes the present narrative so different from those preceding it: In each judgment there was a gracious provision for hope but in this judgment there is none. It does not offer a token of grace, a promise of any blessing, a hope of salvation, or a way of escape. There is no clothing for the naked sinner (Ge 3:21+), no protective mark for the fugitive (Ge 4:15+), no rainbow in the dark sky (Ge 9:12-16+). There is no ray of hope. The primeval age ends with judgmental scattering and complete confusion. The blessing is not here; the world must await the new history. In view of this, the story of the scattering of the nations is actually the turning point of the book from primeval history to the history of the blessing. From this very confused and dispersed situation nations would develop in utter futility until God would make a great nation (ED: ISRAEL) through one man (ED: ABRAM) who himself would be “scattered” from this alluvial plain to the land of Canaan. The blessings of final redemption and unification would come through his seed (ED: Ge 15:5+ WHERE "DESCENDANTS" IN LXX = SPERMA = 2ND PERSON, MASCULINE SINGULAR "SEED" - COMPARE Gal 3:16+). The beginning of Genesis 11 presupposes a linguistic unity and localization comparable to the beginning of Genesis 10. Since the Table of Nations in Genesis 10 describes the many families of the earth “after their families, after their tongues, in their lands, in their nations,” and Genesis 11 describes the divine intervention to scatter them, the question is how this story of the dispersion is compatible with the Table. They appear to be reversed chronologically. Most modern scholars follow the critical view that Genesis 11 is independent of the ethnographic Table and is fundamentally irreconcilable with it. (39) However, this is not seen as a major obstacle, for as von Rad states. “The chapters must be read together because they are intentionally placed next to each other in spite of their antagonism.” (40) (ED: SEE IMPORTANCE OF CONTEXT FOR ACCURATE INTERPRETATION) So while critical scholars are bothered by the antagonisms, they recognize that the two chapters are complementary in referring to the same scattering. The Table of Nations gives absolutely no explanation for the scattering, but “that the author was intending right along to treat of the confusion of tongues appears from Ge 10:25.” (41) There it is stated that in the days of Peleg(“Division”) was the earth divided. Writers have explained this division as some sort of tribal split, (42) or some piece of trivia about conditions at the time, such as, for example, irrigation ditches. (43) The word פֶּלֶג is often used for trenches and irrigation ditches, but the implication of the Table is toward universal events. (44) It is worth noting that the root word occurs in Psalm 55:9 (Eng., 10) for a moral division: “Destroy, O LORD, and divide (פַּלַּג) their tongues” (author’s translation here and throughout the article). The prayer is that God would break apart their counsel into contending factions, an end that is comparable to the story of the division of the nations. So the point of contact appears to be the birth of Peleg (and thus his naming) in Genesis 10. (45) At that point the incident of chapter 11 would have happened, causing the people to spread out into the earth until they settled in their tribes as described in chapter 10. Chapter 11 is the cause; chapter 10 is the effect. The passages are arranged in a manner consistent with Genesis. The broad survey is given first; the narrowing and selection and/or explanation are given afterward. (46) The order is thematic and not chronological. The choice of this reversed order is a stroke of genius. Jacob stated it well: “The placement of chapter 10 before this one is a special refinement. The absurdity of the undertaking becomes obvious if we know the numerical nations into which mankind should grow.” (47) THE PURPOSE OF THE DISPERSION NARRATIVE It should be clear by now that the story of the dispersion is a sequel to the Table of Nations and is designed to explain how the nations speak different languages in spite of their common origin and how they found their way to the farthest corners of the earth. The major theme of the passage is the dispersion of the nations because of their rebellious pride and apostasy in uniting at Babel. But the story is more than an explanation of the scattering; it is an explanation of the problems due to the existence of nations. It was at Babel—that city founded by Nimrod, a descendant of Ham through Cush; that city known for its pride and vanity; that seat of rebellion toward the true God and pagan worship of the false gods—that Yahweh turned ingenuity and ambition into chaos and confusion so that the thing the people feared most came on them and that their desire to be men of renown was suddenly turned against them. For the Israelite nation the lesson was clear: If she was to survive as a nation, she must obey God’s will, for the nation that bristles with pride and refuses to obey will be scattered. (48) (ED: THIS APPLIES TO INDIVIDUALS ALSO!!!) Thus the account of the scattering at Babel has a theological significance for God’s people. FOOTNOTES: NOTE THAT MANY OF THE FOOTNOTES HAVE ACTIVE LINKS TO THE ORIGINAL RESOURCE WHICH CAN BE BORROWED. 1 - B. Jacob, The First Book of the Bible: Genesis (BORROW), ed. and trans. Ernest I. Jacob and Walter Jacob (New York: KTAV Publishing House, 1974), p. 79. Luther felt this story gave rise to the story of the giants trying to expel Jupiter (Jaroslav Pelikan, ed., Luther’s Works, Lectures on Genesis, Chapters 6–14 [St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, 1960], p. 211. 2 - Hugo Gressmann, The Tower of Babel (New York: Jewish Institute of Religion Press, 1928), p. 3. 3 - Delitzsch explains that the primitive language through this intervention “died the death from which comparative philology is incapable of awakening it” (Franz Delitzsch, A New Commentary on Genesis, trans. Sophia Taylor [Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1899), p. 355). 4 - Harold G. Stigers, A Commentary on Genesis (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1976), p, 129. 5 - A. Dillmann, Genesis, Critically and Exegetically Expounded (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1897), p. 387. 6 - Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, s.v. “Bābhel,” by Helmer Ringgren, 1:467. 7 - Spoken of in the singular, the “pure lip” must mean the language barriers will be broken down to make one universal tongue. The second idea in the expression means that their speech will be cleansed. 8- The Bible uses this word for both Ethiopia and the Kassite power. What the connection is remains a matter of debate. In this connection, the similarities between Ethiopic and Akkadian are interesting for speculation. 9 - Derek Kidner, Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1967). p. 110. 16 - E. A. Speiser, Genesis, The Anchor Bible (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Co., 1964), p. 75. It is not to be inferred from this statement that Speiser holds a conservative view of this Scripture. 17 - It is necessary to say at the outset that it is not that the writer saw a ziggurat and composed a myth about the origin of languages, and that this myth somehow found its way into the Book of Genesis. Rather, Genesis implies that such towers had not been built before this and this would be quite unique (Howard F. Vos, Genesis and Archaeology [Chicago: Moody Press, 1963], p. 47). 18 - Emil G. Kraeling, “The Earliest Hebrew Flood Story,” Journal of Biblical Literature 66 (1947): 282. 19 - Cassuto, From Noah to Abraham, p. 227; André Parrot, Ziggurats et Tour de Babel (Paris: Éditions Albin Michel, 1949); Merrill F. Unger, Archaeology and the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1954), p. 47; Encyclopedia Biblica, s.v. “Babylon,” by A. Oppenheim, 2:28. 20 - Hugo Gressmann, The Tower of Babel , pp. 15–19. Gressmann thought the tower structure was related to their understanding of the world with God at the pinnacle, the door of heaven, and man on the slopes of the artificial mountain. The entire world rested on the breast of the underworld. Thus it was fitting for this to be included in primeval events. Most would view it as an artificial high place of worship erected on the plain. 21 - Cassuto, From Noah to Abraham p. 228. Cassuto is (unnecessarily) assuming that the traditions demand a city and a tower in ruins. The judgment passage, however, says absolutely nothing of that at all. The most that is said is that this project was not completed. 22 - E. A. Speiser, Genesis, The Anchor Bible, p. 75. This argumentation is used here simply to show the difficulty in ascribing the identification to E-temen-anki even if one were to take the late date of the composition in accordance with a J document. 23 - E. A. Speiser, “Word Plays on the Creation Epic’s Version of the Founding of Babylon,” Orientalia, n.s. 25 (1956): 317–18. Speiser shows that there is a chronological problem with the date of J and E-temen-anki, but then he adds in his argumentation that other temples also had the-anki element in the name, such as Borsippa’s which was E-ur-me-imin-anki, “house of the seven preceptors of heaven and earth,” so that we are not limited to one reference that first fits the idea with -anki. His point is that the source was literary and not monumental (architectural). 24 -James B. Pritchard, ed., Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament, 3d ed. (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1969), p. 60. Speiser, who translated the Akkadian myths and epics for Pritchard’s work, states at the outset that the majority of the scholars would assign Enuma Elish to the Old Babylonian period on internal evidence alone. Unger explains that it was composed in the days of Hammurabi in the mold of political and religious propaganda to show the preeminence of Babylon and supremacy of Marduk. “However, the poem itself, though one of the literary masterpieces of the Babylonian Semites, goes back to much earlier times. It is clearly based upon the earlier traditions of the Sumerians, the non-Semitic precursors of the Babylonian Semites in lower Babylonia” (Unger, Archaeology and the Old Testament, p. 27). 25 - Speiser, “Word Plays,” p. 319. He compares this to other and similar phrases to show that they did it frequently. 26 Alexander Heidel, The Babylonian Genesis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1942), p. 48. Heidel had the same difficulty attempting to render it “deep.” Speiser says, “I was equally at sea in translating ‘equaling apsû.’ ” Speiser alludes to Enuma Elish, tablet IV, lines 142–45, where apsû = s̆amāmu (Speiser, “Word Plays,” p. 319). 27 The making of the first brick was a trial ordeal before the gods and was to be accomplished by the king. The ceremony of the bricks was to be a sign that the service was offered to the gods (Henri Frankfort, Kingship and the Gods [Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948). pp. 272–74). 28 - Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, s.v. “Bābhel,” by H. Ringgren, 1:467. Ringgren suggests that the metropolis with so many peoples (= languages) was natural for such an account of the dispersion. 29 - Cassuto, From Noah to Abraham, p. 227. 30 - It seems clear that the story did not originate in Babylon. There is no exact correspondence, but that is to be expected since it is a travesty on Babel. Gressmann thought the story came from Babylon to the Assyrians and was brought to the Israelites by the Arameans, but that is unlikely (Hugo Gressmann, The Tower of Babel p. 5). There were stories of the glories of Babylon with all the towers and cult mountains even in Palestine (Gerhard von Rad, Genesis, trans. John Marks [London: SCM Press, 1972], p. 146). Later it would be recorded by the classical writers: Diodorus 2.7; Herodotus 1.178; Strabo 16.1.5; and Pliny 6.121. 31 - Vos, Genesis and Archaeology, p. 47. 32 - S. N. Kramer, “The ‘Babel of Tongues’: A Sumerian Version,” in Essays in Memory of E. A. Speiser, ed. W. W. Hallo (New Haven, CT: American Oriental Society, 1968), pp. 108–11; George Smith, The Chaldean Account of Genesis (New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co., 1876), p. 160. 33 - Cassuto, From Noah to Abraham, pp. 229–30. Cassuto has attempted to reconstruct the type of satirical material behind the passage by relating the passage to the time when Babylon was sacked by the Hittites. The idea of the message as a polemic (against what the Israelites would have known Babylon claimed for herself as opposed to the truth) is an accurate presentation of the message, but Cassuto does not treat the text with precision. In the first place, Genesis presents it as a universal judgment on the race collected in Shinar and not one group of people scattered by the Hittites. True, Cassuto is looking for some occasion and the Hittite invasion is a happy one for him. However, that is unwarranted. Second, there is no hint whatsoever that the city and the tower were reduced to rubble. They were just not completed. Third, the text is not saying that all the languages could be spoken there but that one was once in the beginning and God confounded it. Cassuto’s attempt to take a naturalistic explanation to the occasion for the text weakens it. 34 - Alan Richardson, Genesis I–XI: Introduction and Commentary (London: SCM Press, 1953), p. 124. 35 - Derek Kidner, Genesis: An Introduction and Commentary p. 111. 36 -
Gênesis 11
Piper says this passages "signals that God is not only about to divide their language, but in doing so is about to divide one people into many peoples. He is about to multiply languages and peoples." Ross writes "Kidner observed that the note of foreboding marks a father’s concern and not a rival’s. He shows that it is like Christ’s words in Luke 23:31, “If they do these things in a green tree …” (BORROW Kidner, Genesis:, p. 110). It is better to have division than to have collective apostasy in unity and peace." Paul Apple says that God's Analysis sees 3 major problems - (1) They have Perverted the Blessing of Unity and a Common Language into Conspiratorial Allegiance; (2) They have Started Down the Path of Rebellion and will Continue that Downward Spiral (3) They will become Emboldened if left Unchecked. God’s Action Plan = Frustrate Man’s Agenda And this is what they began to do, and now (expresses result that) nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible (Lit. - "withheld from") for them - Literally "all that they purpose to do will not be withheld from them.” The implication is that their collective intelligence would fan their imagination and make their imaginings reality. Note that while God acknowledges their "human potential," He did not approve it, but in fact thwarted it in order to show His sovereignty over puny mankind. THOUGHT - It is almost 2024 as I write this note. I cannot help but think of the incredible potential of AI (Artificial Intelligence) that has come on the global scene in the past few years. The potential is for good (see picture painted by "AI"), but it is also for evil! Might one see these events in our day as somewhat of a reversal of the tower of Babel and a potential "sign" that we are near the end of this age when God will again "come down" to inspect the world and to war with the world? Ross has a most interesting comment on nothing which they purpose... - The similarity of style and wording to Genesis 3:22 is most striking. The potential for calamity is dangerous to the race, and God will prevent it. The verb חָלַל is used here; the beginnings of man are commonly counterproductive. Compare Nimrod’s beginning with kingdoms and Noah’s beginning with viniculture! They will nullify the purposes of God in favor of their own purposes which are within reach. They will be at liberty for every extravagance if they can think only of their own confederation. Quest Study Bible (BORROW) on nothing which they purpose to do will be impossible suggests that this "Refers to their potential for doing evil. It's similar to our figure of speech "anything can happen." When a culture unites, the power that results can be dangerous. History demonstrates the tragic results when people have power but use it the wrong way. God scattered the people to undermine this potential for destructive behavior. Genesis 11:7 "Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, so that they will not understand one another's speech." Come - The Hebrew word signifies, "Come," or, "make preparation," as for a journey or the execution of a purpose. let - Ge 11:5 1:26 3:22 Isa 6:8 confuse - Job 5:12,13 12:20 Ps 2:4 33:10 Ac 2:4-11 will not - Ge 10:5,20,32 42:23 De 28:49 Ps 55:9 Jer 5:15 1Co 14:2-11,23 Genesis 11 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries Related Passages: Psalm 2:4+ He who sits in the heavens laughs. The Lord scoffs at them. RESULT OF DIVINE INSPECTION: LET'S CONFUSE THEIR SPEECH Come, let Us (see note) go down and there confuse (balal; Lxx = sugcheo) their language - Babylon's "Let's go up!" was answered by God's "Let's go down!" Obviously God did not need to come down, but this phrase lends dramatic effect to His divine intervention. Come is masculine singular. Note the phrase let us which some see as a clue to the Trinity. The word “Us” is taken here as a plural of majesty (note) as in the earlier chapters of Genesis (Ge 1:26, Ge 3:22+). Confuse (balal) is translated in the Lxx with the verb sugcheo which literally means to pour together or mingle and figuratively as in Genesis 11:7 to confuse, stir up, cause dismay (cf God's "reversal" of sorts on Day of Pentecost = Acts 2.6+). The result was "confusion city," with everyone babbling, which drove everyone nuts, so that they had to move away to get some peace and quiet with those they could understand! So that (term of purpose) they will not understand one another's speech - All the workers building the tower started talking gibberish, so that no one understood a thing the others were saying. This is one way to bring a massive building program to a screeching halt! God's purpose was confusion, which is interesting in that Paul writes that God is not a God of confusion in 1Co 14:33+. Of course Paul is referring to unintelligible speech in the midst of the congregation, a completely different context than in Genesis 11 (As an aside, once again we see the vital importance of always interpreting a given text in its context!) Warren
Gênesis 11
Piper has a very interesting insight - So his response to the presumption and arrogance of man was to make it harder for man to communicate and thus to unite in God-belittling global plans. God has built into the world a system by which the pride of different groups of people restrains the pride of other groups of people. God knows the immense potential of human beings created in his own image. And he has given them amazing liberty to exalt themselves and design their own security systems without trusting him. But there are limits. Thousands of languages around the world and thousands of different peoples limit the global aspirations of arrogant mankind. (The Pride of Babel and the Praise of Christ) And they stopped building the city - We might say God had not issued them a "building permit!" Ross - The place of unity (שָׁם) became the place of dispersion (מִשָּׁם). Their view was toward centrality; God moved them universally. The result of this dispersion meant that the city was unfinished as they had planned it. The rebellious race as a unified people did not fulfill their goal. Genesis 11:9 Therefore 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. Babel - Confusion, Ge 10:5,10,20,31 Isa 13:1-14:32 Jer 50:1-51:64 1Co 14:23 the face - Ge 10:25,32 Ac 17:26 Genesis 11 Resources - Multiple sermons and commentaries The Tower of Babel by Pieter Bruegel the Elder (1563) THE PLACE CALLED CONFUSION BECOMES CHAOTIC Therefore Term of conclusion. A fitting conclusion to the confusion caused by their inability to understand one another. One can only imagine the day this confusion hit the unified people and they attempted to communicate with one another. Its name was called Babel (babel), because there the LORD (Jehovah - Yahweh) confused (balal; Lxx = sugcheo) the language of the whole earth - Babel means "the gate of the gods." It is interesting that the Hebrew word Babel occurs over 233x in the OT, but the only place the Lxx translates babel with the noun sugchusis (see note) is in Genesis 11:9! All of the other uses are rendered with a transliteration in the Greek, and thus are rendered "Babylon." John