Genesis 11

 

 

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

And the whole earth. I.e. the entire population of the globe, and not simply

the inhabitants of the land of Shinar (Ingiis; compare ch. 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

vocablesAnd of one speech. Literally, one (kind of) wordsi.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 (compare

 Jegar-sahaduthaGenesis 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.

 

 

 

Unity of Language (v. 1)

 

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.

 

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.

And it came to pass, as they journeyed. Literally, in their journeyings.

The root (גָקַע, to pull up, as, e.g., the stakes of a tent when a camp moves, 

Isaiah 33:20) suggests the idea of the migration of nomadic hordes

(compare ch.12:933:17). 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 ch. 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 another - onwards. That they found a plain בִּקְעָה; not a

valley between mountain ranges, as in Deuteronomy 8:711:11

Psalm 104:8, but a widely-extended plain (πεδίον - pedion - plain -

 Septuagint), like that in which Babylon was situated (Herod., lib. 1:178,

κέεται ἐν πεδιῳ μεγάλῳ - keetai en peoio megalo - it is located in a large

field - compare  Strabo, lib. 2:109). In the land of Shinar. Babylonia

(compare ch. 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.

 

 

 

                                                Note (v. 2)

 

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

traveling 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 scene unchanged.

So comfortable surroundings often lead men from God.

 

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.  And they said one to another. Literally, a man to his neighbor

ἄνθρωπος τῷ πλησίον αὐτοῦ - anthropos to plaesion autou - (Septuagint). 

Go to. A hortatory expletive - come on (Anglice). Let us make brick. 

Nilbenah lebenim; literally, let us brick bricks; πλινθεύσωμεν πλίνθους -

plintheusomen plinthous - (Septuagint); 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 burningvenisrephah lisrephah, a second

alliteration, which, however, the Septuagint. 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 had - literally, and there was

to thembrick 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;

Herod, lib. 1. cp. 179; Justin, lib. 1. cp. 2; Ovid, ' Metam.,' 4:4; and

Aristoph. in Avibus (περιτευχίζειν μεγάλαις πλίνθοις ὀπταῖς ὥσπερ

Βαβυλῶνα), 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; ἄσφαλτος - asphaltos -

(Septuagint); 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 ('Nineveh and

Babylon,' p. 499). 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.

 

 

 

                                    Ancient Brick Makers (v. 3)

 

I. IN SHINAR. Examples of:

 

(1) ingenuity,

(2) earnestness,

(3) perseverance,

(4) unity in sin.

 

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

 

(1) the bondage,

(2) the degradation,

(3) the misery,

(4) the hopelessness, of sin.

 

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.  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. Compare ch.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 Deuteronomy 1:28; 9:1 (compare Homer, 'Odys,' 5:239,

ἐλάτη τ η΅ν οὐρανομήκης - elatae aen suranomaekaes - fir trees are

sky high). This tower is commonly identified with the temple

of Belus, which Herodotus describes (1. 181) 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 ( B.C. 490), 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" ('Assyrian Discoveries,' 12. p. 59;

'Chaldaean Genesis,' p. 163; cf. Layard's 'Nineveh and Babylon,'

chap. 22. p. 496). 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, שֵׁם; neither an idol temple,  ֵשם being

= God, which it never is without the article, הַשֵׁם - compare

Leviticus 24:11 (Jewish writers); nor a monument, as in II Samuel 8:13

(Clericus); nor a metropolis, reading אֵם instead of שֵׁם, as in II Samuel

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 II Samuel 8:13; Isaiah 55:13

(Perizonius, Dathe, Ilgen); but a name, a reputation, as in II Samuel

8:13; Isaiah 63:12,14; Jeremiah 32:20; Daniel 9:15 (Luther, Calvin,

Rosenmüller, 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. Lest - antequam, πρὸ - pro - before that,

as if anticipating that the continuous increase of population would

necessitate their dispersion (Septuagint, 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 פֵן is μή - mae -, lest, introducing an apodosis expressive of

something to be avoided by a preceding action (cf. Gesenius, ' Hebrews

Gram.,' § 152, and Furst, 'Lex.,' sub voce. What the builders dreaded

was not the recurrence of a flood (Josephus, Lyra), but the execution

of the Divine purpose intimated in Genesis 9:1, and perhaps recalled

 to their remembrance by Noah (Usher), or by Shem (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).

 

 

 

                                    The Tower of Babel (v. 4)

 

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.

 

 

 

                                    The Tower-Builders of Babel (v. 4)

 

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 (compare 1 Corinthians

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 (compare

Jeremiah 9:23-24;1 Corinthians 1:29, 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. (As God meant it to be  when He told man to “...be

fruitful, and multiply, andreplenish the earth” [fill the earth with people]

and “subdue it” which means to  find out it’s secrets. ch. 1:28 - CY - 2024)

 

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 speaking — one 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 (Proverbs 15:3; Hebrews 4:13), while

there is a day coming when “there is nothing covered that shall not be

revealed” (Matthew 10:26).

 

2. Every work of man shall be judged at the bar of God (Ecclesiastes

12:14; 1 Corinthians 3:13). The Divine verdict upon human

undertakings will often strangely conflict with the judgments of men.

 

IV. THE CONFUSION OF THEIR TONGUES.

 

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

 

(a) 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.

 

(b) 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.

 

(c) 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:

 

(a) Unexpected in its coming, as are all God’s judgments, like the Flood

and like the coming of the Son of man.

 

(b) 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.

 

(c) 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.

 

(d) 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” (II Timothy 3:8) 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 after — an emblem of that shame which shall eventually be the

portion of all the wicked.

 

·         LEARN:

 

1. The sinfulness of wrong 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.

 

 

           

 

                                    God’s City or Man’s City (v. 4)

 

“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 (ch. 9:1; compare Mark 16:15). They were promised

safety from beasts, of whom, if separated, they might be afraid (ch. 9:2; compare

Matthew 10:29,31; Luke 10:19). Here was a trial of faith and obedience (compare

Exodus 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 (Hebrews 11:10-16), to live as citizens

of it (Philippians 3:20). They chose a city for themselves; earthly security,

comforts,  and luxuries.  Called to glorify God’s name, their thought was to

make a name for themselves. Self was the moving power (and apparently

still is!  CY - 2024)  The name of God is the trust of His people (Psalm 20:7;

Proverbs 18:10); a center of unity to all His children in every place. They

trusted in themselves; would be like a 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 (compare Matthew 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 12:22).

To prepare the way for Revelation 21:3. The gifts of Christ are made

effectual by the work of men. That city, built of living stones (1 Peter 2:5),

cemented not with slime, but by unity of faith (Ephesians 4:3). And a

tower, a center of unity, the “good confession” (Romans 14:11;

Philippians 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” (Revelation 2:17; 22:4). And promise given, as if pointing

to Babel: “Your labor is not in vain in the Lord.” (I Corinthians 15:58)

 

II. MANY HAVE NO MIND TO BUILD. They love ease and have no

earnestness, triflers with time, or direct their earnestness to earthly prizes

— a 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

(1 Corinthians 10:13).

 

5 And the LORD came down to see the city and the tower, which the

children of men builded.  And the Lord came down. Not in visible form,

as in Exodus 19:20; Exodus 34:5 (Onkelos), but "effectu ostendens

se propin quiorem quem absentem esse judicabant" (Poole), an

anthropomorphism (compare ch.18:21; Psalm 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 men - sons of Adam;

neither the posterity of Cain, i.e. the Hamites exclusively, as

the Sethites were called sons of God, ch. 6:2 (Augustine), 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   - builded.

 

 

 

 

                        The Cities of Men and The City of God (v. 5)

                                         (v. 5; Hebrews 11:16).

 

I. THEIR BUILDERS. Of the first, men — mostly wicked men; of the

    second, the Architect of the universe.

 

II. THEIR ORIGIN. Of the first (Enoch [a different Enoch - son of Cain,

     than he of ch. 5:19-24] ch. 4:17; and Babel, ch. 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. (Revelation chapters.

       21 and 22)

 

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.

 

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.  And the Lord said -

within Himself, and to Himself (see v. 8); expressive of the formation of a

Divine resolution (compare v. 8) - Behold, the people - עַס, from the root

signifying to bind together, expresses the idea of association; גּוי, from a root

signifying to swell (Lange), to flow together (Gesenius), to gather together

(Furst), conveys the notion of a confluxus hominum (unity of effort, as well

as concentration of design,). 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; οὐκ ἐκλείψει ἀπ αὐτῶν

πάντα - ouk ekleipsei apo auton -  (Septuagint); non desistent a cogitationibus

suis - they do not cease from their thoughts (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

(I find it most interesting, if of no significance, that the word ἐκλείψει

(eclipse) is in this verse that I am studying on April 6, 2024, two days

before a total eclipse of the sun is to occur across America, southwest to

northeast, scheduled for April 8, 2024, around 2 p.m. central time.  CY -2024)

 

 

 

                                    Vain Imaginings (v. 6)

 

1,  These 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 (compare Romans 1:21;

II Timothy 3:9).

 

2. They are never unobserved by God against whom they are

directed (Deuteronomy 31:21; 1 Chronicles 28:9).

 

3. They are doomed to certain and complete frustration

(Psalm 2:1; Luke 1:51; II Corinthians 10:5).

 

7  Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they

may not understand one another’s speech.  Go to. An ironical contrast

to the "Go to" of the builders (Lange). Let us (compare Genesis 1:26)

go down, and there confound their language (see v. 9), that they may

not understand (literally, hear; so ch. 42:23; Isaiah 36:11;

1 Corinthians 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).

 

 

                                    Babel and Zion (v. 7)

 

1. Confusion, division, dispersion.

2. Gathering the dispersed, uniting the divided, restoring order

    to the confused.

 

8 So the LORD scattered them abroad from thence upon the face of

all the earth: and they left off to build the city.  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.

 

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.

Therefore is the name of it called Babel. For Balbel, confusion (σύγχυσις -

sugchusis - confusion; disorder; upheaval - Septuagint, Josephus), from Balal,

to confound; the derivation given by the sacred writer in the following clause

(compare for the elision [omission] of the letter l, totaphah for tophtaphah,

Exodus 13:16, and cochav for covcav, here, ch.  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 Bab-il, the gate of God

(Rosenmüller, 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 confound - how 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 second - the 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 tongues - a statement which is supposed to

conflict with the findings of modern 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) a Shemitic,

            (b) an Aryan, and

            (c) 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 (compare  Kurtz, 'Hist. of the Old Covenant,' vol. 1. pp. 108-117

(Clark's For. Theol. Lib.), 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 heaven. 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 (marked If, 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. 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, am-

 

"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."

                ('Records of the Past,' vol. 7. p. 131; cf. ' Chaldaean Genesis, p. 160.)

 

 

 

 

                                    Order Brought Forth (vs. 1-9)

 

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 safety — the high tower to keep above the flood.

2. False ambition — reaching 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.”

 

10 These are the generations of Shem: Shem was an hundred years

old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood:  These are the

generations of Shem. The new section, opening with the usual formula

(compare ch. 5:1; 6:9; 10:1), reverts to the main purpose of the inspired

narrative, which is to trace the onward development of the line of promise;

and this it does by carrying forward the genealogical history of the holy

seed through ten generations till it reaches Abram. Taken along with

ch. 5, with which it corresponds, the present table completes the

chronological outline from Adam to the Hebrew patriarch. Shem

was an hundred years old (literally, the son of an hundred years, i.e. in

his hundredth year), and begat Arphaxad. The English term is borrowed

from the Septuagint., the Hebrew being Arpaehshadh, a compound of

which the principal part is כשד, giving rise to the Chashdim or Chaldeans;

whence Professor Lewis regards it as originally the name of a people

transferred to their ancestor (compare ch. 10:22). Two years after the flood.

So that in Noah's 603rd year Shem was 100, and must accordingly have

been born in Noah's 503rd year, i.e. two years after Japheth (compare

ch. 5:32; 10:21). The mention of the Flood indicates the point of time

from which the present section is designed to be reckoned.

 

11 And Shem lived after he begat Arphaxad five hundred years, and

begat sons and daughters.  And Shem lived after he begat Arphaxad

five hundred years (making his life in all 600 years), and begat sons

and daughters (concerning whom Scripture is silent, as not being

included in the holy line).

 

12 And Arphaxad lived five and thirty years, and begat Salah:

13 And Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three

years, and begat sons and daughters.  And Arphaxad lived five and

thirty years (the first indication of a change having transpired upon

human life after the Flood, the average age of paternity prior to that

event being 117, the earliest 65, and the latest 187), and begat Salah. 

Shalach, literally, emission, or the sending forth, of water, a memorial

of the Flood (Bochart); or of an arrow or dart (see ch.10:24). And

Arphaxad lived after he begat Salah four hundred and three years 

(making a total of 438, i.e. 339 years less than the youngest complete

life in the prediluvian table, - Enoch's, of course, being excepted,

and 162 less than Shem's: a second indication of the shortening of

the period of existence), and begat sons and daughters.

 

14 And Salah lived thirty years, and begat Eber:  15 And Salah lived

after he begat Eber four hundred and three years, and begat sons

and daughters. And Salah lived thirty years, and begat Eber.

Literally, the region on the otherside (πέραν - peran); from עָבַר,

to pass over (compare ὑπέρ - huper -  Greek; uber, German; over, Saxon).

The ancestor of the Hebrews (ch. 10:21), so called from his descendants

having crossed the Euphrates and commenced a southward emigration,

or from the circumstance that he or another portion of his posterity

remained on the other side. Prof. Lewis thinks that this branch of the

Shemites, having lingered so long in the upper country, had not much

to do with the tower building on the plain of Shinar. And Salah lived

after he begat Eber four hundred and three years (in all 433 years,

or five years less than Arphaxad), and begat sons and daughters.

 

16 And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg:  17 And Eber

lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty years, and begat sons

and daughters.  And Eber lived four and thirty years, and begat Peleg. 

Division; from palag, to divide. For the reason of this cognomen see

ch. 10:25And Eber lived after he begat Peleg four hundred and thirty years 

(thus reaching the age of 464, the longest-lived of the postdiluvian fathers), 

and begat sons and daughters.

 

18 And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu:  19 And Peleg lived after

he begat Reu two hundred and nine years, and begat sons and daughters.

And Peleg lived thirty years, and begat Reu. Friend (compare of God,

or of men), or friendship; from a root signifying to pasture, to tend, to

care for. Bochart traces his descendants in the great Nisaean plain

Ragan (Judith 1:6), situated on the confines of Armenia and Media,

and having, according to Strabo, a city named Ragae or Ragiae

And Peleg lived after he begat Reu two hundred and nine years 

(thus making his entire age 239 years), and begat sons and daughters.

 

20 And Reu lived two and thirty years, and begat Serug:  21 And Reu lived

after he begat Serug two hundred and seven years, and begat sons and

daughters.  And Reu lived two and thirty years, and begat Serug. Vine-shoot,

from sarag, to wind (Gesenius, Lange, Lewis, Murphy); strength, firmness,

from the sense of twisting which the root bears (Furst). And Reu lived after

he begat Serug two hundred and seven years (in all 239), and begat sons

and daughters.

 

22 And Serug lived thirty years, and begat Nahor:  23 And Serug lived

after he begat Nahor two hundred years, and begat sons and daughters.

And Serug lived thirty years, and begat Nahor.  Panting.. (Gesenius); from 

nachar, to breathe hard, to snort. Piercer, slayer (Furst); from an unused

root signifying to bore through. And Serug lived after he begat Nahor

two hundred years (or 230 in all), and begat sons and daughters

 

24 And Nahor lived nine and twenty years, and begat Terah:

25 And Nahor lived after he begat Terah an hundred and nineteen

years, and begat sons and daughters.  And Nahor lived nine and

twenty years, and begat Terah. Terach, or turning, tarrying; from 

tarach, an unused Chaldaean root meaning to delay (Gesenius);

singularly appropriate to his future character and history,

from which probably the name reverted to him. Ewald renders Terach 

by "migration, considering Tarach = arach, to stretch out. And Nahor

lived after he begat Terah an hundred and nineteen years 

(148 in all, the shortest liver among the postdiluvian patriarchs), 

and begat sons and daughters.

 

26 And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.

And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram. First named on account of

his spiritual pre-eminence. If Abram was Terah's eldest son, then, as Abram

was seventy-five years of age when Terah died (ch. 12:4), Terah's whole life

could only have been 145 years. But Terah lived to the age of 205 years

(here, v. 32); therefore Abram was born in Terah's 130th year. This, however,

makes it surprising that Abraham should have reckoned it impossible for

him to have a son at 100 years (ch.17:17); only, after having lived so long

in childless wedlock, it was not strange that he should feel somewhat

doubtful of any issue by Sarai. Kalisch believes that Stephen (Acts 7:4)

made a mistake in saying Terah died before his son's migration from Charran,

and that he really survived that event by sixty years; while the Samaritan

text escapes the difficulty by shortening the life of Terah to 145 years. 

And Nahor, who must have been younger than Haran, since he married

Haran's daughter. And Haran, who, as the eldest, must have been born in

Terah's seventieth year. Thus the second family register, like the first,

concludes after ten generations with the birth of three sons, who, like Noah's,

are mentioned not in the order of their ages, but of their spiritual pre-eminence.

 

 

 From this table it appears that 292 years, according to the Hebrew text, passed

away between the Flood and the birth, or 292 +75 = 367 between the Flood and

the call of Abraham. Reckoning, however, the age of Terah at Abram's birth as

130 (see Exposition), the full period between the Deluge and the patriarch's

departure from Haran will be 367 + 60 = = 427 years, which, allowing five

pairs to each family, Murphy computes, would in the course of ten generations

yield a population of 15,625,000 souls; or, supposing a rate of increase equal

to that of Abraham's posterity in Egypt during the 400 years that elapsed from

the call to the exodus, the inhabitants of the world in the time of Abraham

would be between seven and eight millions. It must, however, be remembered

that an element of uncertainty enters into all computations based upon even

the Hebrew text. The age of Terah at the birth (apparently) of Abram is put

down at seventy. But it admits of demonstration that Abram was born in the

130th year of Terah. What guarantee then do we possess that in every instance

the registered son was the firstborn? In the case of Arphaxad this is almost

implied in the statement that he was born two years after the Flood. But

if the case of Eber were parallel with that of Terah, and Joktan were the son

that he begat in his thirty-fourth year, then obviously the birth of Peleg, like

that of Abram, may have happened sixty years later; in which case it is

apparent that any reckoning which proceeded on the minute verbal accuracy

of the registered numbers would be entirely at fault. This consideration might

have gone far to explain the wide divergence between the numbers of the

Samaritan and Septuagint as compared with the Hebrew text, had it not been

that they both agree with it in setting down seventy as the age of Terah at the

date of Abram's birth. The palpable artificiality also of these later tables renders

them even less worthy of credit than the Hebrew. The introduction by the

Septuagint of Cainan as the son of Arphaxad, though seemingly confirmed by

Luke (Luke 3:35-36), is clearly an interpolation. It does not occur in the

Septuagintversion of 1 Chronicles 1:24, and is not found in either the Samaritan

Pentateuch, the Targums or the ancient versions, in Josephus or Philo, or in the

Codex Beza of the Gospel of Luke. Its appearance in Luke (and probably also

in the Septuagint) can only be explained as an interpolation. Wordsworth is

inclined to regard it as authentic in Luke, and to suppose that Cainaan was

excluded from the Mosaic table either to render it symmetrical, as Luke's

table is rendered symmetrical by its insertion, or because of some moral

offence, which, though necessitating his expulsion from a Hebrew register,

would not prevent his reappearance in his proper place under the gospel.



                        From Shem to Abram (vs. 10-26)

 

I. THE SEPARATION OF THE GODLY SEED. The souls that

constitute the Church of God upon the earth are always, as these Hebrew

patriarchs:

 

1. Known to God; and that not merely in the mass, but as individuals, or

units; nor simply superficially and slightly, but minutely and thoroughly. He

knows the fathers they descend from, the families they belong to, the

names by which they are designated, the number of years they live, and the

children they leave behind them on the earth (compare Psalm 1:6;

II Timothy 2:19).

 

2. Separated by God. This was one of the great ends contemplated by the

division of the people which happened in the days of Peleg, which was

designed to eliminate the Shemites from the rest of mankind. Then the

migration of the sons of Eber contributed further to the isolation of the

children of the promise. And, lastly, the selection of the son, not always the

firstborn, through whom the hope of the gospel was to be carried on

tended in the same direction. So God afterwards separated Israel from the

nations. So He still by His providence and His word calls out and separates

His people from the world (compare 1 Kings 8:53; II Corinthians 6:17).

 

3. Honored before God; by being selected as:

 

a. the vessels of His grace,

b. the channels of His promise,

c. the ministers of His gospel, and

d. the messengers of His covenant,

 

while others are passed by; and by being written in God’s book of remembrance,

while others are forgotten (compare 1 Samuel 2:30;  4:10-22; Psalm 91:15;

Malachi 3:16; Matthew 10:32; II Timothy 2:20; Revelation 3:5).

 

II. THE SHORTENING OF HUMAN LIFE. A second characteristic of

the postdiluvian era.

 

1. A patent fact. Even Shem, the longest liver of the men of this period, did

not continue on the earth so long as Lamech, the shortest liver of the

previous age, by 177 years; while the life of Arphaxad was shorter than

that of his father by 162 years, and the days of Terah at the close dwindled

down to 205 years.

 

2. A potent sermon. Whether the comparative brevity of life immediately

after the Flood was due to any change in the physical constitution of man,

or to the altered conditions of existence under the Noachic covenant, or to

the gradual deterioration of the race through the lapse of time, or to the

direct appointment of Heaven, it was admirably fitted to remind them of:

 

a. The reality of sin. With its penalty descending so noticeably  and

frequently it would seem impossible to challenge the fact of their being a

guilty and condemned race.

 

b. The necessity of repentance. Every death that happened would sound

like a trumpet-call to sinful men to turn to God.

 

c. The vanity of life. The long terms of existence that were meted out to

men before the Flood might tempt them to forget the better country, even

an heavenly, and to seek a permanent inheritance on earth; it would

almost seem apparent to these short livers that no such inheritance could be

obtained below. Alas that the shortness of man’s career beneath the sun is

now so familiar that it has well nigh ceased to impress the mind with

anything!

 

d. The certainty of death. When men’s lives were counted by centuries it

might be easy to evade the thought of death. When decades came to be

enough to reckon up the longest term of existence, it could scarcely fail to

remind them that “it was appointed unto all men once to die”

 

III. THE NEARING OF THE GOSPEL PROMISE. Ten generations

further down the stream of time do we see the promise carried in this

second genealogical table. It was:

 

1. A vindication of the Divine faithfulness in adhering to His promise.

Already twenty generations had come and gone, and neither was the

promise forgotten nor had the holy line been allowed to become extinct.

Ever since Adam’s day in Eden THE COVENANT-KEEPING JEHOVAH

had found a seed to serve Him, even in the darkest times, and had been

careful to raise up saints who would transmit the hope of the gospel to

future times. It was a proof to the passing generations that God was still

remembering His promise, AND WAS INTENDING TO MAKE IT GOOD

IN THE FULLNESS OF TIMES!

 

2. A demonstration of God’s ability to keep his promise. Not once through

all the bygone centuries had-a link been found wanting in the chain of

saintly men through whom the promise was to be transmitted. It was a

clear pledge that God would still be able to supply the necessary links that

might be required to carry it forward to its ultimate fulfillment.

 

 

                                    The Order of Grace (vs. 10-26)

 

1. Determined by God, and not by man.

2. Arranged after the Spirit, and not according to the flesh.

3. Appointed for the world’s good as well as for the Church’s safety.

 

                        THE PATRIARCHAL AGE OF THE WORLD

                                                 (ch. 11:27-50:26)

 

                       

 

                                      The Generations of Terah

                                           (ch. 11:27-25:11)

 

27 Now these are the generations of Terah: Terah begat Abram, Nahor, and

Haran; and Haran begat Lot.  Now (literally, and, intimating the close connection

of the present with the preceding section) these are the generations - the

commencement of a new subdivision of the history (Keil), and neither the

winding-up of the foregoing genealogy ('Speaker's Commentary') nor the heading

only of the brief paragraph in vs. 27-32 (Lange; see ch. 2:4) - of Terah. Not of

Abram; partly because mainly occupied with the career not of Abram's son,

in which case "the generations of Abram" would have been appropriate, but

of Abram himself, Terah's son; and partly owing to the subsidiary design to

indicate Nahor's connection, through Rebekah, with the promised seed

(compare Quarry, p. 415). Terah begat Abram, "Father of Elevation," who

is mentioned first not because he happened to be Terah's eldest son (Keil),

which he was not (see v. 26), or because Moses was indifferent to the order in

which the sons of Terah were introduced (Calvin), but because of his spiritual

preeminence as the head of the theocratic line (Wordsworth). Nahor, "Panting,"

not to be confounded with his grandfather of the same name (v. 25). Haran,

"Tarrying," the eldest son of Terah (v. 26), and, along with Abram and Nahor,

reintroduced into the narrative on account of his relationship to Lot and Milcah.

That Terah had other sons (Calvin) does not appear probable, And Haran begat Lot. 

לוט; of uncertain etymology, but may be = לוּט, a concealed, i.e. obscure, low one,

or perhaps a dark-colored one (Furst).

 

 

28 And Haran died before his father Terah in the land of his nativity,

in Ur of the Chaldees.  And Haran died before his father. Literally, 

upon the face of his fatherἐνώπιον τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ - enopion tou

patros autou - face to face; in sight of, in presence of;  in front of (Septuagint);

while his father was alive (Munster, Luther, Calvin, Rosenmüller); perhaps

also in his father s presence (Keil, Lange), though the Jewish fable may

be discarded that Terah, at this time an 'idolater, accused his sons to Nimrod,

who cast them into a furnace for refusing to worship the fire-god, and that

Haran perished in the flames in his father s sight. The decease of Haran is the

first recorded instance of the natural death of a son before his father. 

In the land of his nativity. Ἐν τῇ γῇἐγεννήθη  -  En tae gae ae

egennaethae - in the land of his birth (Septuagint). In Ur of the Chaldees. 

Ur Kasdim (ch. 11:31; 15:7; Nehemiah 9:7). The Kasdim - formerly

believed to have been Shemites on account of:


1.  Abram's settlement among them,

            2.  the preservation of the name Kesed among his kindred (ch. 22:22),

            3.  the close affinity to a Shemite tongue of the language known to

                  modern philologists as Chaldee, an Arameean dialect differing but

                  slightly from the Syriac (Heeren), and

            4.  the supposed identity or intimate connection of the Babylonians

                 with the Assyrians (Niebuhr) - are now, with greater probability,

                 and certainly with closer adherence to Biblical history (ch. 10:8-12),

                 regarded as having been a Hamite race (Rawlinson, Smith); an

                 opinion which receives confirmation from:


                        (a) the statement of Homer ('Odyss. ,' 1:23, 24), that the

                             Ethiopians were divided and dwelt at the ends of

                             the earth, towards the setting and the rising sun, i.e.,

                             according to Strabo, on both sides of the Arabian Gulf;

                       

                        (b) the primitive traditions:

 

                                    (α) of the Greeks, who regarded Memnon, King of Ethiopia,

                                          as the founder of Susa (Herod., 5:54), and the son of a

                                          Cissian woman (Strabo, 15:3, § 2;

                                    (β)  of the Nilotic Ethiopians, who claimed him as one of their

                                           monarchs; and

                                    (γ) of the Egyptians, who identified him with their King

                                         Amunoph III., whose statue became known as the

                                         vocal Memnon (see Rawlinson's 'Ancient Monarchies,'

                                         vol. 1. p. 48);

 

                        (c) the testimony of Moses of Chorene ('History of Armenia,' 1:6),

                             who connects in the closest way Babylonia, Egypt, and

                             Ethiopia Proper, identifying Belus, King of Babylon, with

                             Nimrod, and making him the son of Mizraim, or the grandson

                             of Cush; and:


                        (d) the monumental history of Babylonia, which shows the language

                              of the earliest inscriptions, according to Rawlinson "differing

                              greatly from the later Babylonian," to have been that of a

                             Turanian people (cf. 'Records of the Past,' vol. 3. p. 3).

                             The term Ur has been explained to be identical with It,

                              a city (Rawlinson); the Zend Vare, a fortress (Gesenius); 

                             Ur, the light country, i.e. the land of the sun-rising (Furst);

                              and even Ur,fire, with special reference to the legendary

                              furnace already referred to (Talmudists). Whether a

                              district (Septuagint, Lange, Kalisch) or a city (Josephus,

                              Eusebius, Onkelos, Drusius, Keil, Murphy, 'Speaker's

                              Commentary'), its exact site is uncertain. Rival claimants

                              for the honor of representing it have appeared in:


                                   
(α) a Persian fortress (Persicum Castellum) of the name

                                          of Ur, mentioned by Ammianus Marcellinus

                                         (75. 100. 8) as lying between Nisibis and the Tigris

                                         (Bochart, Michaelis, Rosenmüller, Delitzsch);

                                    (β) the modern Orfah, the Edsssa of the Greeks, situated

                                          "on one of the bare, rugged spurs which descend

                                           from the mountains of Armenia into the Assyrian

                                           plains" (Stanley's 'Jewish Church,' 1:7); and.

                                    (γ) Hur, the most important of the early capitals of Chaldaea,

                                         now the ruins of Mugheir, at no great distance from the

                                         mouth, and six miles to the west, of the Euphrates

                                         (Rawlinson's 'Ancient Monarchies,' 1:15, 16; Smith's '

                                         Assyrian Discoveries,' 12:233; 'Records of the Past,'

                                         vol. 3. p. 9).

 

Yet none of them is quite exempt from difficulty. A military fort, to take the

first-named location, does not appear a suitable or likely place for a nomadic

horde to settle in; while the second has been reckoned too near Charran, the

first place of encampment of the emigrants; and the third, besides being

exceedingly remote from Charran, scarcely harmonizes with Stephen's

speech before the Sanhedrim (Acts 7:2). Unless, therefore, Stephen meant

Chaldsea when he said Mesopotamia (Dykes), and Abraham could speak

of Northern Mesopotamia as his country (ch. 24:4), when in reality he

belonged to Southern Babylonia, the identification of Ur of the Chaldees

with the Mugheir ruin though regarded with most favor by archaeologists,

will continue to be doubtful; while, if the clan march commenced at

Edessa, it will always require an effort to account for their coming to a

halt so soon after starting and so near home; and the Nisibis station, though

apparently more suitable than either in respect of distance, will remain

encumbered with its own peculiar difficulties. It would seem, therefore,

as if the exact situation of the patriarchal town or country must be left

undetermined until further light can be obtained.

 

29 And Abram and Nahor took them wives: the name of Abram’s wife was

Sarai; and the name of Nahor’s wife, Milcah, the daughter of Haran, the

father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah. And Abram and Nahor took them

wives (compare ch. 6:2): the name of Abram's wife was Sarai. "My princess,"

from sarah, to rule (Gesenius, Lange); "Strife" (Kalisch, Murphy): "Jah is ruler"

(Furst). The Septuagint write Σάρα - Sara -  changing afterwards to Σαῥῤα -

Sarra to correspond with Sarah. That Sarai was Iscah (Josephus, Augustine,

Jerome, Jonathan) has been inferred from ch. 20:12; but, though receiving

apparent sanction from v. 31, this opinion "is not supported by any solid

argument" (Rosenmüller). And the name of Nahor's wife, Milcah (Queen, or

Counsel), the daughter of Haran, i.e. Nahor's niece. Marriage with a half-sister

or a niece was afterwards forbidden by the Mosaic code (Leviticus 18:9, 14). 

The father of Milcah, and the father of Iscah, whose name "Seer" may have

been introduced into the narrative like that of Naamah (ch. 4:22), as that of

an eminent lady connected with the family (Murphy). Ewald's hypothesis,

that Iscah was Lot's wife, is pure conjecture.

 

30 But Sarai was barren; she had no child.  Perhaps in contrast to Milcah,

who by this time had begun to have a family (Murphy).

 

 

 

                                    Two Weddings (vs. 29-20)

 

I. THE TWO BRIDEGROOMSAbram and Nahor.

 

1. Younger sons in Terah s family.

2. Eminent men in Ur of the Chaldees.

3. Favored saints in the Church of God. “Marriage is honorable in

    all and the be undefiled.”  (Hebrews 13:4)

 

II. THE TWO BRIDESSarai and Milcah.

 

1. Near relations of their husbands. Though permissible at that early stage

of the world’s history, the intermarriage of relatives so close as half-sister

and niece is not now sanctioned by the law of God.

2. Attractive ladies in themselves. As much as this may be inferred from

their names. It is both allowable and desirable to seek as wives women

distinguished for beauty and intelligence, provided also they are noted

for goodness and piety.

3. Descendants of the holy line. Doubtless this was one cause which led

to the choice of Abram and Nahor. So Christians should not be unequally

yoked with unbelievers.  (I Corinthians 6:14)

 

III. THE TWO HOMES. Formed it might be at the same time, and under

similar benignant auspices, they were yet divided.

 

1. And from the first in their constitutions. This was of necessity.

2. And afterwards in their fortunes.

            (a) Sarai had no child;

            (b) Milcah was the mother of a family. “Lo, children are the

                heritage of the Lord.”  (Psalm 127:3)

3. And eventually in their locations.

            (a) Nahor and Milcah remained in Ur, and ultimately moved

                  to Haran;

            (b) Abram and Sarai pitched their tent and established their

                  home in Canaan.

 

So God parts the families of earth.

 

31 And Terah took Abram his son, and Lot the son of Haran his son’s

son, and Sarai his daughter in law, his son Abram’s wife; and they

went forth with them from Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land

of Canaan; and they came unto Haran, and dwelt there.  And Terah took -

an act of pure human volition on the part of Terah (Kalisch); under the

guidance of God's ordinary providence (Keil); but more probably, as Abram

was called in Ur (vide infra), prompted by a knowledge of his son's call, and

a desire to participate in his son's inheritance (Lange) - Abram his son, and

Lot the son of Haran his son's son, and Sarai his daughter-in-law, his son

Abram's wife. The Samaritan reads, "and Milcah his daughter-in-law,

the wives of Abram and Nahor his sons," with an obvious intention to

account for the appearance of Nahor as a settler in Charran (ch. 24:10);

but it is better to understand the migration of Nahor and his family as having

taken place subsequent to Terah's departure. And they went forth with them. 

I.e. Lot and Sarai with Terah and Abram (Keil); or, better, Terah and Abram

with Lot and Sarai (Jarchi, Rosenmüller, Murphy, 'Speaker's Commentary);

though best is the interpretation, "and they went forth with each other"

(Lange, Kalisch). For the reflexive use of the personal pronoun see ch. 3:7;

22:3, and compare Gesenius, 'Gram.,'§ 124. Other readings are, "and he led

them forth" (Samaritan, Septuagint, Vulgate, Dathius), and "and they (the

 unnamed members of the family) went forth with those named" (Delitzsch). 

From Ur of the Chaldees, to go into the land of Canaan. Expressive of the

Divine destination, rather than of the conscious intention of the travelers

(Hebrews 11:8), though Canaan was not at this time unknown to the

inhabitants of the Tigris and Euphrates valley (see ch. 14:1-12). And they

came into HaranCharranΚαῥῤαι  - Karrai -  Carrae, in northwest

Mesopotamia, about twenty-five miles from Edessa, one of the supposed

sites of Ur, and celebrated as the scene of the overthrow of Crassus by the

Parthians ( B.C. 53). And dwelt there. Probably in consequence of the

growing infirmity of Terah, the period of their sojourn being differently

computed according as Abram is regarded as having been born in Terah's

70th or 130th year.

 

 

 

 

                        The Migration of the Terachites (v. 31)

 

I. THE DEPARTURE OF THE EMIGRANTS. The attendant

circumstances of this migration — the gathering of the clan, the mustering

of the flocks, the farewells and benedictions exchanged with relatives and

friends, the hopes and fears of the adventurous pilgrims — imagination

may depict; the reasons which prompted it may be conjectured to have

been:

 

1. The spirit of emigration, which since the dispersion at Babel had been

abroad among the primitive populations of mankind. The arms of a Trans-

Euphratean state had already penetrated as far west as the circle of the

Jordan, and it has been surmised that this Terachite removal from Chaldaea

may have been connected with some larger movement in the same

direction.

 

2. The oppression of the Hamites, who, besides being the most powerful

and enterprising of the early tribes, and having seized upon the fattest

settlements, such as Egypt, Canaan, and Chaldaea, had wandered farthest

from the pure Noachic faith, and abandoned themselves to a degraded

polytheism, based for the most part upon a study of the heavenly bodies.

That the Cushite conquerors of Southern Babylonia were not only

idolaters, but, like Nimrod, their leader, destroyers of the liberties of the

subject populations, has at least the sanction of tradition.

 

3. The awakening of religious life in the breasts of the pilgrims. That

Abram had by this time been called we are warranted on the authority of

Stephen to hold, and though Terah is expressly said to have been an

idolater in Ur, it is by no means improbable that he became a sharer in the

pure faith of his distinguished son. At least it lends a special interest to this

primitive migration to connect it with the call of Abram.

 

II. THE JOURNEY OF THE EMIGRANTS. Though upon the incidents

and experiences of the way, as upon the circumstances and reasons of the

departure, the inspired record is completely silent, yet the pilgrimage of the

Chaldaean wanderers was:

 

1. From an idolatrous land, which could not fail to secure, even had it not

already received, the Divine approbation. Not that flight from heathen

countries is always the clear path of duty, else how shall the world be

converted? But where, as was probably the case with the Terachites, the

likelihood of doing good to is less than that of receiving hurt from the

inhabitants, it is plainly incumbent to withdraw from polluted and polluting

lands.

 

2. By an unknown way. Almost certainly the road to Canaan was but little

understood by the exiles, if even Canaan itself was not entirely a terra

incognita (an unknown or unexplored territory). Yet in setting forth upon

a path so uncertain they were only doing what mankind in general, and

God’s people in particular, have always to do in life’s journey, viz., travel

by a way that they know not; while for comfort they had the sweet

assurance that their path was steadily conducting them from idols and

oppression, and the certain knowledge that they were journeying beneath

the watchful and loving superintendence of the invisible Supreme. Happy

they whose path in life, though compassed by clouds and darkness, ever

tends away from sin and slavery, and never lacks the guidance of

Abram’s God!  (Compare Hebrews 11:8-16)

 

3. To a better country. In comparison with the rich alluvial soil of Southern

Babylonia, the land of Canaan might be only a bleak succession of barren

hills; but, in respect of liberty to worship God, anywhere, in the eyes of

men whose hearts were throbbing with new-found faith, would seem

superior to idolatrous Chaldaea. Without endorsing Luther’s fancy, that

Shem and his followers had already withdrawn to Palestine, and that Terah

and his family were setting forth to place themselves beneath the

patriarch’s rule, we may reasonably suppose that, like the Pilgrim Fathers

of a later -age, they were seeking a new land where they might worship

God in peace.

 

III. THE HALTING OF THE EMIGRANTS. In the absence of definite

information as to the motives which induced it, this sudden stoppage of

their journey at Haran is usually ascribed to either:

 

1. The irresolution of Terah, who, having become wearied by the fatigues

and perils of the way, and having found a comfortable location for himself

and flocks, preferred to bring his wanderings to a close, as many a noble

enterprise is wrecked through weak-kneed vacillation, and many a

Christian pilgrimage broken short by faint-hearted indecision; or:

 

2. The unbelief of Terah, who, in the first flush of excitement produced by

Abram’s call, had started on the outward journey with strong faith and

great zeal, but, as enthusiasm subsided and faith declined, was easily

persuaded to halt at Haran — an emblem of other pilgrims who begin their

heavenward journey well, but pause in mid career through the cooling of

their ardor and declining of their piety; or:

 

3. The infirmity of Terah, who was now an old man, and unable further to

prosecute his journey to the promised land, thus making the delay at Haran

a beautiful act of filial piety on the part of Abram, and on that of Terah an

imperious necessity.

 

See in this migration of, the Terachites:

 

1. An emblem of the changefulness of life.

2. An illustration of God s method of distributing mankind.

3. An example of the way in which an overruling Providence disseminates

    the truth.

4. A picture of many broken journeys on the face of earth.

 

 

(As a side note:  According to Henry M. Morris in his book The Genesis Record

 

This passage suggests that Terah himself may have received some kind of

command from the Lord to go to the land of Canaan.  If so, he only obeyed

in part.  He left Ur all right; but instead of striking directly westward across

the desert to Canaan, he moved northwest up the Mesopotamian valley,

finally reaching Haran............It is possible that Stephen in Acts 7:2-4, refers

to Terah becoming “dead” as far as God’s will for his life was concerned.

Stephen also noted that Abram received God’s call originally while still

in Mesopotamia, as indeed might be inferred from the fact that Abram

decided to take his own family along and go with Terah in his journey toward

Canaan.  Perhaps God appeared to both Terah and Abram in Ur, and they

both set out to Canaan together, father and son.  Terah, however, delalyed

long in Haran and it eventually became apparent to Abram that his father

no longer intended to go on to Canaan.  The prosperity and comfort at

Haran [Haran was apparently the settlement that had been established by

Terah’s son Haran, or to which at least his name had become attached].

Ur was in the lower reaches of the Euphrates, on the  Persian Gulf.

Originally, before the millennia of delta deposits that have since formed

downstream, it was actually a great seaport.  Haran was perhaps 600 miles

northwest, where Canaan was about the same distance due west.......pp. 288-289

 

I thought this was interesting. - CY - 2024)

 

32 And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years: and Terah

died in Haran.  And the days of Terah were two hundred and five years.

So that if Abram was born in Terah's 70th year, Terah must have been 145

when Abram left Haran, and must have survived that departure sixty years

(Kalisch, Dykes); whereas if Abram was born in his father's 130th year, then

Terah must have died before his son s departure from Haran, which agrees

with Acts 7:4. And Terah died in Haran.

 

 

                                    Divine Traditions (vs. 10-32)

 

This is a genealogy of Shem and of Terah, in order to set forth clearly the

position of Abraham and that of his nephew Lot, and their connection with

Ur of the Chaldees and Canaan. The chosen family is about to be separated

from their country, but we are not told that there was no light of God

shining in Ur of the Chaldees.  Probably there was the tradition of Shem’s

knowledge handed down through the generations.

 

·         Arphaxad was born two years after the Flood;

·         Salah, thirty-seven years;

·         Eber, sixty-seven years;

·         Peleg, one hundred and one years;

·         Reu, one hundred and thirty-one years;

·         Serug, one hundred and sixty-three years;

·         Nahor, one hundred and ninetythree years;

·         Terah, the father of Abraham, two hundred and twenty-two years:

 

no great length of time for traditions to be preserved. The call of

Abram was not merely his separation from idolatry, but his consecration to

the special vocation of founding the religious institutions which were to be

connected with his family.

 

 

"Excerpted text Copyright AGES Library, LLC. All rights reserved.

Materials are reproduced by permission."

 

This material can be found at:

http://www.adultbibleclass.com

 

If this exposition is helpful, please share with others.