THE TOWER OF BABEL (GENESIS 11:1-9)

This is a very well known story, but you may be surprised to learn there are still several opinions as to what it is all about, especially regarding the exact nature of the sin and God's subsequent response to it.

    1. One interpretation is that it is simply an etiological tale (i.e. one made up to explain the origin of something) giving a reason for the various languages and national groups in the world. This view mainly comes from critical sources which tend to label most of the Genesis 1-11 as inspired myth which may possess a good moral but is not really based on historical reality.

As Ross says, “The significance of this short account is great. It explains to God's people how the nations came to be scattered abroad. The import, however, goes much deeper.”

    2. Another take on the story is that the people of Babel didn't do anything particularly wrong, but their concerted actions caused God to detect a future threat to His own power if allowed to continue. Those who hold to this view often cite the similarity to Genesis 3:22 where God expresses alarm that Adam and Eve might eat of the Tree of Life and have eternal life as He does. For example, Carr interprets God's words in v. 6 as His “fearing the human power that might result from ethnic and linguistic unity.” But one would have to possess an exceedingly low view of God to believe that He was concerned in any way whatsoever about the possibility of any humans being raising themselves up to threaten God's sovereignty in any way.

In the case of the Tower of Babel episode this is made abundantly clear in Genesis 11:4-5 where the inhabitants of Babel attempt to build a tower with its top in the heavens. But in order to view this grand tower, God needs to “come down” to even see it. It is that puny.

    3. A much more acceptable and favored view is a variation on the theme that God's fear was indeed that mankind had overstepped its bounds. However, the potential danger wasn't to His own status but to the danger they might do to themselves and the creation when they attempted to increase the time of their existence (Genesis 3) or limit the space that God wished them to occupy (Genesis 11). As Ringgren puts it, “This action of God is both punishment and a preventative measure; it prevents men from going too far in their pride.”

    4. Michael S. Heiser has practically made a career of promulgating his unique view that the sin of the people at Babel was so bad that God scattered them to the winds and washed His hands of these people, who became the “nations” of the earth. For example, in his book Unseen, Heiser repeatedly (64 times) states that these nations because of their actions at Babel were “disinherited,” “abandoned,” “forsaken,” or “punished.” But he never once explains this view or the exact nature of the sin that caused such a serious reaction from God. In addition, the idea of God abandoning the other nations is contradicted in passages such as Isaiah 19:25; 54:5; and Jeremiah 32:27. For more on Heiser's views, see my post “Psalm 82.”

    5. God intended for mankind to continue living off of the land rather than settling in a city. This view is countered by Andrews: “God punished their arrogance by scattering them abroad over the face of the earth. But no mention is made in the text that this scattering is intended to foster a return to the ideal of a pastoral, nomadic lifestyle.”

    6. God was upset over the use of new technology to build the tower (baked bricks and tar as mortar). Apparently, this view has been proposed at one time or another. However, it is expressly denied by scholars such as Martens and Osborne.

Of the above views, only #3 commands almost universal acceptance. And within that framework, the general nature of the sin involved at Babel has been variously described:

Kline says that “their own further dispersion from Babel (vv. 8f.) is recorded as a special judgment on their blatant embodiment of the ungodly spirit that again after the Flood characterized human civilization...The city once more (cf. Gn. 4) becomes the cultural focus of mounting arrogance.”

Ellison: “The memory of the Flood seems only to have acted merely as a call to show man's power in defiance of God.”

As to the exact nature of the sin described in Genesis 11, it really contains three components:

    1. The first is best expressed by Jacques Ellul: “The point of the story is the problem of the name, and the city and its tower are a means of obtaining the name. How important a name was for an Israelite is well known. It is the sign of dominion and has a spiritual quality. God gave a name to the first man. Man in turn named all the animals. Thus a relationship is established in which the one named becomes the object of the one naming...They want to name themselves.” He explains this as “the desire to exclude God from his creation.” But God “knows that man's spiritual conquest can lead only to one end – spiritual and material death...But because God wants his creatures to live, he keeps the break from happening.”

Wenham seconds Ellul's view when he says that 'to make a name for ourselves' “suggests impiety...elsewhere in Scripture it is God alone who makes a name for himself.”

    2. The second aspect concerns the tower itself and what it represents. Osborne states, “traditionally the sin that God punished in the Babel story has been seen as an act of hubris in which human beings attempted to build a tower that would, in their view, enable them to assault heaven itself (much like Adam and Eve's sin).” And Wenham says, “From a purely human viewpoint, building a tower as high as the sky is an audacious undertaking, but it seems likely that Genesis views it as a sacrilege...building the tower, an arrogant undertaking in itself, may be the forerunner of yet further trespass on the divine prerogatives.”

Also, Hamilton feels that the intent in building the tower was not to actually reach heaven but “the completion of such a titanic building would bring a certain fame and immortality to its builders.” He supports that view of their motive by citing the fact that “with its peak in the heavens” and similar language is employed figuratively in passages such as Deuteronomy 1:28; 9:1 and Jeremiah 51:53.

There may indeed be an element of this aspect in Genesis 11, but even this is not the whole story.

    3. “Whereas earlier verses in the narrative mentioned both the city and the tower (vv. 4,5), the conclusion to v. 8 focuses only on the halting of the city. This indicates that it was the building of the city, and not the tower per se, that provoked divine displeasure.” (Hamilton) Thus, Wenham says, “Possibly the desire to congregate in one place should be seen as a rejection of the divine command 'to be fruitful, multiply and fill the earth.'”

Similarly, Osborne mentions that some “have argued that the builders' disobedience at Babel was simply their determination to resist the divine command to spread out and 'fill the earth,' a stance that God had to overcome so that the intended blessing could proceed.” And Mertens says that the “sin, so it might be inferred, [was] because of a people's refusal to fill the earth as God commanded and also because of humans' invading the divine realm and so exceeding set limits.”

A.P. Ross seems to also endorse this view although he words it a little differently: “Their major error was not the building of a city or a tower but the attempt to unite and live in one place...According to the Lord's evaluation, their desire to enhance their unity and strength has potential for the greatest evil.”

GRACE

One aspect of God's response to the tower builders that is often ignored is that He is not merely punishing them, and certainly not abandoning them as Heiser repeatedly claims, but He is also protecting them. In this respect, God's actions are consistent with Him providing suitable clothing for Adam and Eve after they had sinned (Genesis 3:21) as well as hinting at a future savior for mankind in Genesis 3:15. Similarly, note the way that God provided Cain with a protective mark after he had killed his brother and was condemned to wander (Genesis 4:12-15). Here is what several scholars have to say on this subject:

Osborne: The builders' use of power and technology “to create a stronghold for a meaningful life apart from God inevitably posed a threat to the ordered world. It would, therefore, ultimately invite divine intervention, both in judgment and with offers of grace.” The punishment “led to the dreadful loss of human unity: the 'one people' ('am) became the 'nations' (goyim), so God chose, in Abraham, a new 'am through which to bless the whole world.”

Williamson specifically connects the call of Abraham in the very next episode of Genesis with the tower of Babel incident, suggesting that “the promissory agenda of Genesis 12:1-3 comprises the element of divine grace that otherwise would, somewhat anomalously, be missing.”

Heath: “By introducing many languages and scattering the people, God spares people and the rest of creation from the evil consequences that would otherwise result.” He cites this as yet another of God's many acts of grace.