The Tale of a Tower

I have been ruminating on this next blog post for some time, trying to come up with a way to communicate the complexities of the story as it was communicated to me.  I intentionally point out that it was "communicated to me", for the issues are so deeply rooted in the Hebrew language that I myself am most certainly not the one qualified to speak on them from a linguistic perspective.

I can make a few points that may help communicate what's taking place here.  At the risk of oversimplification, the ancient Hebrew language of the Bible is a language of consonants.  The vowels that are added to a Hebrew word act as the linguistic nuances that define "which word" we are using.  However, because the Hebrew words will share consonants, they often end up being grouped in what's been described to me as "word families" — words that share the same consonant base (the same root) and therefore are driven by a common image.

The classic example (transliterated, of course) is the Hebrew word DBR.  DBR are the consonants, obviously, and adding different vowels make different words.  DaBaR would be the Hebrew word for "speak" or "word".  DoBeR would be a word for "pasture" and miDBaR would be a related word for "wilderness" or "desert".  All of these words are using the same DBR root and the vowels are bringing the words to life.  All the words play off of the same image of shepherding.  A shepherd leads his flock in a PASTURE or in the WILDERNESS by SPEAKING a WORD.

(On a really cool side note, I have been told that when Jesus is speaking on trial before the high priest, his statement to him is a re-vowelization of two separate passages in the Psalms.  Essentially, Jesus keeps all of the consonants of the passages the same and changes the vowels [and shifts the consonants] in his response.  How well does Jesus know his Bible!?  That's astounding!)

Having tried to explain as simply as I can how the consonants of the Hebrew language work — again, noting I am not the expert in that area — I will say that the entire story of the Tower of Babel is a play on the Hebrew consonants.  I once listened to a teaching by Rabbi David Fohrman, where he recited the Hebrew and noted all of the play on words with the Hebrew consonants N'B'L'H and I was left sucking my thumb in a corner.

Needless to say, the story of the Tower, when heard in the Hebrew is chiastic.  The chiasm can best be seen in the English when you compare 10:32 with 11:8-9 and then finding the center of the chiasm in 11:4.  You can even see some of the other elements in the English when you notice the mention of "city with a tower" and even the "Come, let us..."

So why would the entire point of the story be God's desire to scatter humans over the whole earth?  Is God really threatened by their advances?

In a lot of ways, we've already let the proverbial cat out of the bag by noting that these post-flood stories are paralleling the earlier pre-flood stories.  We'll spend more time tying all of this together in the next post, but if we step back and view the last ten chapters in context, one might begin to gain some perspective on why God is so intent on scattering humanity.

God started the story by affirming the goodness of creation and inviting humanity to join Him in His rest and trust the goodness of the story.  Adam and Eve fail to trust God, fail to master their desires, and press on in pursuing themselves.  Cain is invited to trust in God's goodness and avoid the consequences that his fear (of personal loss/gain) will drive him to, but he fails as well.

God reaffirms the goodness of creation in the story of the flood and then Noah walks out of the ark and pursues revenge, stepping into the role of God — trying to become the Creator — and cursing his grandson.  In that context (and skipping a whole lot of ancient, midrashic conversation) is where we begin to find some clues.

Man's rebellion is starting to organize itself.  After eating from the Tree of Knowledge, mankind is indeed beginning to look like God, but not in a way that is helpful or beneficial to God's plan for them.  Man's rebellion started with a sense of exploration, then to self-preservation, then to revenge.  And now, God's statement is that if He doesn't step in a do something "nothing will be impossible for them".

In another sense, sin has started with an individual, moved into a family, curses an entire lineage and is now threatening to become an entire civilization.

God knows that man is not ready to exercise their creativity in it's fullness.  They haven't learned how to trust the story.  They haven't learned how to harness their desires.  They will not know "when to say enough".  They will not know when to stop destroying.

And so he scatters mankind.

A few observations to take away from this story:

This story, in one sense, is about the advancement of technology.  Humans have created the brick.  It is their new advancement in ordering creation.  It is significant to note that the advancement and progress is not a bad thing.  Within the story, God apparently has no problem with their creation of the brick, their use of the brick together, or even their building of the tower.  It is not until the people seek to "create a name" for themselves — to become like God — that God steps in to foil their plans.  The advancement of technology in our world is never the evil; we are confronted with the question of rebellion as we consider how we might USE this new piece of technology.  Will we use it further God's creative purposes to order and redeem creation?  Or will we use it further our own agenda and pursue our own unbridled desires?

Most scholars agree that the word used for Babel is a play off of the Hebrew word for confusion.  As God steps into the story, it is interesting to note what God does not do.  He does not condemn the work project in and of itself.  He does not curse anyone.  He does not deal out punishments and/or consequences for sin (as He does in Genesis 3).  What He does is confuse all of humanity with the disruption of language.

Which leads us to the question: Why would He do that?

To put it as Rabbi Fohrman so beautifully taught: It is interesting to note how in order for humanity to continue to progress as a whole, they will need to learn the language of others.  You cannot learn the language of another culture or people without learning something about their perspective.  Learning the diversity of perspectives always provides one with a sense of pause and consideration.  It requires a sense of learning how to control one's desires in order to reach a common goal together.  In the confusion of Babel, God has not so much slapped our hands as he has given us a new redemptive project that will cause us to be people that grow into the kind of humanity that bears His image.  A humanity that knows when to say enough.

A people that trust the Story.
A people that just might find a place of rest.