Genesis · Chapter 11

V. 1. And the whole earth was of one language-Now while they all understood one another, they would be the more capable of helping one another, and the less inclinable to separate.

Verse 1. The whole earth was of one language] The whole earth-all mankind was of one language, in all likelihood the HEBREW; and of one speech-articulating the same words in the same way. It is generally supposed, that after the confusion mentioned in this chapter, the Hebrew language remained in the family of Heber. The proper names, and their significations given in the Scripture, seem incontestable evidences that the Hebrew language was the original language of the earth-the language in which God spake to man, and in which he gave the revelation of his will to Moses and the prophets. “It was used,” says Mr. Ainsworth, “in all the world for one thousand seven hundred and fifty-seven years, till Phaleg, the son of Heber, was born, and the tower of Babel was in building one hundred years after the flood, Genesis 10:25; 11:9. After this, it was used among the Hebrews or Jews, called therefore the Jews’ language, Isaiah 36:11, until they were carried captive into Babylon, where the holy tongue ceased from being commonly used, and the mixed Hebrew (or Chaldee) came in its place.” It cannot be reasonably imagined that the Jews lost the Hebrew tongue entirely in the seventy years of their captivity in Babylon; yet, as they were mixed with the Chaldeans, their children would of course learn that dialect, and to them the pure Hebrew would be unintelligible; and this probably gave rise to the necessity of explaining the Hebrew Scriptures in the Chaldee tongue, that the children might understand as well as their fathers. As we may safely presume the parents could not have forgotten the Hebrew, so we may conclude the children in general could not have learned it, as they did not live in an insulated state, but were mixed with the Babylonians. This conjecture removes the difficulty with which many have been embarrassed; one party supposing that the knowledge of the Hebrew language was lost during the Babylonish captivity, and hence the necessity of the Chaldee Targums to explain the Scriptures; another party insisting that this was impossible in so short a period as seventy years.

Verses 1, 2. The whole earth was of one language — This even heathen writers acknowledge; and that language was, probably, the Hebrew. They journeyed from the east of Shinar, where Noah had settled when he left the ark. They were, therefore, now travelling westward.

Verse 1. One language or lip. These words are to be literally understood, because it is added, God confounded their language. There has been a long and unavailing dispute whether the Chaldaic, the Hebrew, or the Arabic was the most ancient language. But since the oriental languages were studied, this subject has been discussed with more success. Epiphanius, a bishop of the fourth age, wrote in five languages, and he gives the name of dialects, not distinct languages, to the families whose tongue God confused. The learned Professor Ihre of Sweden has proved, that the Gothic, the Hebrew, and the Persic had one origin, the radicals of innumerable words being the same. Our Sir William Jones, (discourse 6.) affirms that all the languages of India have descended from the language once spoken in the empire of Iran, which the French write Irak or Erech, Genesis 10.; that is, Persia. The Greek, the Gothic, the Latin, the Irish, the Welsh, have one origin, for in all the numerals, one, two, three are the same, and are scarcely varied in spelling. If we had records of the old Greek before the schools altered it, the coincidence between the Gothic and the Greek would be yet more striking. Our missionaries in Ceylon have found a long list of words which have at least one radical letter or more remaining, of the Hebrew and the English. The doctrine of Moses is therefore established beyond dispute, that the whole world had one origin, and one tongue. The confusion at Babel was but a variation of dialect and names, as is wittily described by Du Bartus, a French poet translated by Sylvester, and quoted here by John Trapp.

“Bring me, quoth one, a trowel quickly, quick

One brings him up a hammer; hew this brick

Another bids, and then they cleave a tree;

Make fast this rope, and then they let it flee.

One calls for plank, another mortar lacks;

They bring the first a stone, the last an axe.”

THE CONFUSION OF TONGUES, 1-9.

The narrative here again doubles back upon itself to give the cause of the national divisions described in chap. 10. It reverts to an event which took place in the days of Peleg, (Genesis 10:25,) the fourth in descent from Shem. As the unity of the human race, in the strictest sense of the word, is declared by the account of the deluge, which reduced all mankind to a single family from which the whole world was repeopled, so in this chapter the unity of language is declared, and the primal cause of all the lingual diversities is set forth. The diversity of languages is a divine judgment upon human selfishness and pride, leading to manifold national misunderstandings and bloody conflicts, thus sorely hindering intellectual and moral progress, yet also serving as a providential hinderance to sin. Pride had already broken the bond of brotherly unity, and hence the human family, feeling the lack of that inward attraction, sought an outward unity. Thus ever in history is man drawn to his brother by his instincts, yet perpetually repelled from him by selfishness. Hence the vast monarchies which in all ages have striven to consolidate the race, yet have ever been distinguished by luxury, or have exploded in revolution. Hence the hierarchies, which, through bloody centuries, have blindly striven to make good the lack of love’s fusing flame by chaining men in the unity of ecclesiastical despotism. As sin vanishes, and the brotherhood of charity is restored, these differences of language will vanish also, for in the Messianic reign all “people, nations, and languages shall serve Him,” (Daniel 7:14,) an epoch foreshadowed by the Pentecostal miracle, which made every man to hear the truth in his own language.

1. Whole earth… one language… one speech — Hebrew, as margin, one lip and one words. The whole population of the earth was one lip, and one kind of words. They were one in the manner (lip) and the matter (words) of language, that is, they had the same words for things, and the same modes of expression. There is no tautology, as in the common translation, but there are here two distinct ideas, 1) the same stock of words, and 2) the same inflexions and pronunciation. The Noachian language was probably the immediate parent of the Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac. This primitive language has long ago vanished, but its ruins or debris are scattered everywhere, and can, with more or less certainty, be traced toward a parent formation. There are known at present, according to Kaulen, 860 languages, divided into three great families: 1) isolating, 2) agglutinative, and 3) inflective, each of the last two being regarded as derived from the next preceding; and the science of philology, by studying their manifold analogies and differences, is steadily reducing them to species and genera, all leading up to ultimate unity. The lines of variation all converge toward a distant centre, which, though it may never be scientifically reached, yet is seen by scientific faith. While languages are structurally divided, as above, they are also genealogically divided into Shemitic, Hamitic, and Aryan. This last is a provisional division, having a great number as yet unclassified. We give on pp. 156, 157, Schleicher’s genealogical tree of the Shemitic and Aryan families, the dotted lines representing the dead languages. Of course this represents the present phase of philological knowledge and opinion, and is subject to revision by the advance of science. The Hamitic family has not yet been satisfactorily analysed. It may be mentioned that the Egyptian is considered by Max Muller as an offshoot of the original Asiatic tongue, before it was broken up into Turanian, Semitic, and Aryan.

One or two illustrations of the unity in this vast variety may suffice. The consonant t, interchanged with its cognates d and th, is the essential element of the second personal pronoun (English thou) in the principal languages of the Shemitic and Aryan families, both as a separate pronoun and as a personal termination. The Hebrew for thou is attah (masc.) and at, (fem.,) thou killest is Katalta (masc.) and Katalt, (fem.) This consonant conveys the idea of the second person through all the conjugations, or species. The same law is seen in Arabic, Syriac, Ethiopic, and Coptic of the Shemitic family. Look now into the Aryan or Indo-European family, and we find in Sanscrit, tua; in Beng., tui; Russ., tu; Greek, su; Latin and its descendants, tu; German, Dutch, and Danish, du; Gothic and Saxon, thu; English, thou. As a personal ending it is replaced by or used in connexion with its cognate s; thus, for thou art, we have Sanscrit, asi; Russ., gesi; Greek, eiv; Latin, es; German, bist, etc. All languages, as far as analyzed, may, according to Max Muller, be reduced to four or five hundred roots, or phonetic types, which form their constituent elements. These sounds are not interjections, nor imitations, but are produced by a power inherent in human nature when the appropriate occasions arise. Man instinctively uses these sounds to express certain conceptions, and they become modified by composition, inflexion, etc., so as to finally produce the infinite varieties of language. Thus the two consonants B (with its cognates P and F) and R, taken together, are instinctively used to express the idea of bearing, or sustaining; take as examples, hrp, ferw, fero, bhri, bairan, baren, Barov, bairn, bear, burden, pario, fructus, fruit, etc.

V. 2. And they found a plain in the land of Shinar-A spacious plain, able to contain them all.

Verse 2. As they journeyed from the east] Assyria, Mesopotamia, and the country on the borders and beyond the Euphrates, are called the east in the sacred writings. Balaam said that the king of Moab had brought him from the mountains of the east, Numbers 23:7.

Now it appears, from Numbers 22:5, that Balaam dwelt at Pethor, on the river Euphrates. And it is very probable that it was from this country that the wise men came to adore Christ; for it is said they came from the east to Jerusalem, Matthew 2:1. Abraham is said to have come from the east to Canaan, Isaiah 41:2; but it is well known that he came from Mesopotamia and Chaldea. Isaiah 46:11, represents Cyrus as coming from the east against Babylon. And the same prophet represents the Syrians as dwelling eastward of Jerusalem, Isaiah 9:12: The Syrians before, µdqm mikkedem, from the east,the same word which Moses uses here. Daniel Daniel 11:44, represents Antiochus as troubled at news received from the east; i.e. of a revolt in the eastern provinces, beyond the Euphrates.

Noah and his family, landing after the flood on one of the mountains of Armenia, would doubtless descend and cultivate the valleys: as they increased, they appear to have passed along the banks of the Euphrates, till, at the time specified here, they came to the plains of Shinar, allowed to be the most fertile country in the east. See Calmet. That Babel was built in the land of Shinar we have the authority of the sacred text to prove; and that Babylon was built in the same country we have the testimony of Eusebius, Præp. Evang., lib. ix., c. 15; and Josephus, Antiq., lib. i., c. 5.

Verses 1, 2. The whole earth was of one language — This even heathen writers acknowledge; and that language was, probably, the Hebrew. They journeyed from the east of Shinar, where Noah had settled when he left the ark. They were, therefore, now travelling westward.

2. As they journeyed — Literally, in their breaking up (their encampments;) as they struck their tents and slowly moved with flocks and herds from day to day. The word sets forth the leisurely movements of a nomadic company. It is not necessary to suppose that the whole human race were in this movement. Noah and Shem, who were probably living at the time, would hardly sympathize in the godless enterprise about to be described. From the east — Or better, as the margin, eastward. Comp. Joshua 7:2; Judges 8:11. They slowly moved from the table-land of Armenia, eastwardly and southerly, along the Euphrates valley to the rich alluvial plain… of Shinar, the region afterwards known as Chaldea and Babylonia. Here was a fertile country in a genial climate, offering a delightful place for permanent residence.

V. 3. Go to, let us make brick, let us build us a city-The country being a plain, yielded neither stone nor morter, yet that did not discourage them, but they made brick to serve instead of stone, and slime, or pitch, instead of morter.

Some think they intended hereby to secure themselves against the waters of another flood, but if they had, they would have chosen to build upon a mountain rather than upon a plain. But two things it seems they aimed at in building.

1. To make them a name: they would do something to be talked of by posterity. But they could not gain this point; for we do not find in any history the name of so much as one of these Babel-builders. Philo Judeus saith they engraved every one his name upon a brick; yet neither did that serve their purpose.

2. They did it to prevent their dispersion; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth-It was done (saith Josephus) in disobedience to that command, Genesis 9:1, replenish the earth. God orders them to scatter. No, say they, we will live and die together. In order hereunto they engage themselves and one another in this vast undertaking. That they might unite in one glorious empire, they resolve to build this city and tower, to be the metropolis of their kingdom, and the center of their unity.

Verse 3. Let us make brick] It appears they were obliged to make use of brick, as there was an utter scarcity of stones in that district; and on the same account they were obliged to use slime, that is, bitumen, (Vulg.) asfaltov, (Septuagint) for mortar: so it appears they had neither common stone nor lime-stone; hence they had brick for stone, and asphaltus or bitumen instead of mortar.

Verses 3, 4. Let us make brick, let us build a city — The country, being a plain, yielded neither stone nor mortar; yet this did not discourage them; but they made brick to serve instead of stone, and slime instead of mortar; a kind of clay or pitch called bitumen, which, as Pliny testifies, is liquid and glutinous, and fit to be used in brick buildings, as Strabo, Dion, and others observe. And that Babylon was built with this and with brick, as is here said, we have the joint testimony of Berosus, Etesius, Dion, Curtius, and many others. It has been thought that they intended hereby to secure themselves against the waters of another flood; but if they had, they would have chosen to build upon a mountain rather than upon a plain. But two things, it seems, they aimed at in building. 1st, To make them a name — A great name; out of pride and vain glory to erect a monument that should remain to all posterity: and, 2d, To prevent their dispersion; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth — It was done (saith Josephus) in disobedience to that command, Genesis 9:1, Replenish the earth — That they might be united in one glorious empire, they resolve to build this city and tower, to be the metropolis of their kingdom, and the centre of their unity.

3. Said one to another — Hebrews, each man to his neighbour. Go to — An obsolete English expression, equivalent to come on. Burn them thoroughly — In distinction from the sun-dried bricks, so common in Babylonia, which yet are very hard and durable. They had brick for stone — Stone being the building material with which the Hebrews were chiefly familiar in Egypt. Slime — Bitumen; mineral pitch or asphalt. Although the Babylonian plain has no quarries in or near it, yet, being largely composed of fine sand and clay, it furnishes ample material for the most beautiful and durable bricks. All the splendid edifices of Babylon were built of burnt or sun-dried brick. The plain also abounds in bitumen; called naphtha, when it appears as a thin yellow fluid; petroleum, when thicker and darker; and asphaltum when solid. This substance furnishes an imperishable cement. It was used by Noah in the construction of the ark; by the mother of Moses in the manufacture of her little papyrus boat; by the Egyptians in fastening the cerements of mummies; and is now used by the natives of ancient Shinar in making the ferry boats of the Tigris, which are simply round baskets, daubed with bitumen. The asphalt springs of Is, or Hit, a small stream flowing into the Euphrates, are mentioned by Herodotus, and are thus quaintly described by an old traveller: “Near unto which town (Hit on the river Hit) is a valley of pitch, very marvellous to behold, and a thing almost incredible, wherein are many springs throwing out abundantly a kind of black substance like unto tar, or pitch, which serveth all the countries thereabouts to make staunch their barks and boats, every one of which springs maketh a noise like a smith’s forge, in puffing and blowing out the matter, which never ceaseth, night or day, and the noise is heard a mile off, swallowing up all weighty things that come upon it. The Moors call it the mouth of hell.” — Quoted in Rawlinson’s Herodotus, 1:316.

Verse 4. Let us build us a city and a tower] On this subject there have been various conjectures. Mr. Hutchinson supposed that the design of the builders was to erect a temple to the host of heaven-the sun, moon, planets, &c.; and, to support this interpretation, he says בשמים וראשו verosho bashshamayim should be translated, not, whose top may reach unto heaven, for there is nothing for may reach in the Hebrew, but its head or summit to the heavens, i.e. to the heavenly bodies: and, to make this interpretation the more probable, he says that previously to this time the descendants of Noah were all agreed in one form of religious worship, (for so he understands tja hpcw vesaphah achath, and of one lip,) i.e. according to him, they had one litany; and as God confounded their litany, they began to disagree in their religious opinions, and branched out into sects and parties, each associating with those of his own sentiment; and thus their tower or temple was left unfinished.

It is probable that their being of one language and of one speech implies, not only a sameness of language, but also a unity of sentiment and design, as seems pretty clearly intimated in Genesis 11:6. Being therefore strictly united in all things, coming to the fertile plains of Shinar they proposed to settle themselves there, instead of spreading themselves over all the countries of the earth, according to the design of God; and in reference to this purpose they encouraged one another to build a city and a tower, probably a temple, to prevent their separation, “lest,” say they, “we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth:” but God, miraculously interposing, confounded or frustrated their rebellious design, which was inconsistent with his will; see Deuteronomy 32:8; Acts 17:26; and, partly by confounding their language, and disturbing their counsels, they could no longer keep in a united state; so that agreeing in nothing but the necessity of separating, they went off in different directions, and thus became scattered abroad upon the face of the earth. The Targums, both of Jonathan ben Uzziel and of Jerusalem, assert that the tower was for idolatrous worship; and that they intended to place an image on the top of the tower with a sword in its hand, probably to act as a talisman against their enemies. Whatever their design might have been, it is certain that this temple or tower was afterwards devoted to idolatrous purposes. Nebuchadnezzar repaired and beautified this tower, and it was dedicated to Bel, or the sun.

An account of this tower, and of the confusion of tongues, is given by several ancient authors. Herodotus saw the tower and described it. A sybil, whose oracle is yet extant, spoke both of it and of the confusion of tongues; so did Eupolemus and Abydenus. See Bochart Geogr. Sacr., lib. i., c. 13, edit. 1692. On this point Bochart observes that these things are taken from the Chaldeans, who preserve many remains of ancient facts; and though they often add circumstances, yet they are, in general, in some sort dependent on the text. 1. They say Babel was built by the giants, because Nimrod, one of the builders, is called in the Hebrew text rwbg gibbor, a mighty man; or, as the Septuagint, gigav, a giant. 2. These giants, they say, sprang from the earth, because, in Genesis 10:11, it is said, He went, awhh ãrah מנ min haarets hahiv, out of that earth; but this is rather spoken of Asshur, who was another of the Babel builders. 3. These giants are said to have waged war with the gods, because it is said of Nimrod, Genesis 10:9, He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; or, as others have rendered it, a warrior and a rebel against the Lord. See Jarchi in loco. 4. These giants are said to have raised a tower up to heaven, as if they had intended to have ascended thither. This appears to have been founded on “whose top may reach to heaven,” which has been already explained. 5. It is said that the gods sent strong winds against them, which dispersed both them and their work. This appears to have been taken from the Chaldean history, in which it is said their dispersion was made to the four winds of heaven, aymv yjwr [brab bearba ruchey shemaiya, i.e. to the four quarters of the world. 6. And because the verb xwp phuts, or xpn naphats, used by Moses, signifies, not only to scatter, but also to break to pieces; whence thunder, Isaiah 30:30, is called xpn nephets, a breaking to pieces; hence they supposed the whole work was broken to pieces and overturned. It was probably from this disguised representation of the Hebrew text that the Greek and Roman poets took their fable of the giants waging war with the gods, and piling mountain upon mountain in order to scale heaven. See Bochart as above.

Verses 3, 4. Let us make brick, let us build a city — The country, being a plain, yielded neither stone nor mortar; yet this did not discourage them; but they made brick to serve instead of stone, and slime instead of mortar; a kind of clay or pitch called bitumen, which, as Pliny testifies, is liquid and glutinous, and fit to be used in brick buildings, as Strabo, Dion, and others observe. And that Babylon was built with this and with brick, as is here said, we have the joint testimony of Berosus, Etesius, Dion, Curtius, and many others. It has been thought that they intended hereby to secure themselves against the waters of another flood; but if they had, they would have chosen to build upon a mountain rather than upon a plain. But two things, it seems, they aimed at in building. 1st, To make them a name — A great name; out of pride and vain glory to erect a monument that should remain to all posterity: and, 2d, To prevent their dispersion; lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the earth — It was done (saith Josephus) in disobedience to that command, Genesis 9:1, Replenish the earth — That they might be united in one glorious empire, they resolve to build this city and tower, to be the metropolis of their kingdom, and the centre of their unity.

Ver. 4. A tower, said to be 5164 paces high, and the circumference equal to the elevation. Heylin’s Geog. A circuitous road was made on the outside so broad that carrs could pass one another. This tower, or temple as it was afterwards called, was not finished, it would seem, till the reign of Semiramis, which Herodotus thus describes. “The temple of Jupiter Belus was in the city on the opposite side of the river (to that where the palace stood.) There was in the midst of the temple a tower, which was a furlong thick, and equal in height. Upon this tower was another, and then a third, and eight in all. It had a gradual ascent, and at each turn a recess, and a seat cut in the wall, where those who ascended might rest. In the last tower there was a chapel, &c.” Clio. Of the first tower Abydenus, as quoted by Origen and afterwards by Eusebius, speaks thus. “The first men were born of the earth, and of great bodily strength; and affecting great antiquity they built a tower of immense height, where Babylon is now situate. When they had raised it very high towards heaven, a great wind from the gods threw it down, and from its rude mass of ruins Babylon derives its name. Till that time men had all been of one language.” Præparat. 9:14.

From the above it is plain enough that the long-lived sires understood architecture, and consequently, geometry and the use of letters. Cadmus, as Pliny, lib. 5. c. 39, and others all agree: he adds, that the Pelasgians brought letters into Latium or Italy. lib. 8. c. 56. But the figure of the letters was long in a fluctuating state. In 1735, Placentinius published at Rome a work in 4to. entitled, Epitome Græcæ Palæographiæ, &c. in which the author from manuscripts and ancient stones exhibits near 300 figures of the 22 letters which now compose that alphabet. This subject is much relieved by the Scandinavian society. In 1742, Sir Erick Biorner published at Stockholm, Cogitationes critico philologicæ de orthographia Linguæ Sveo Gothicæ, in which by fac similes of Runic stones, cut to promulgate laws, and to perpetuate the memory of expeditions, he proves that the Hebrew and the Gothic alphabets had an identity of origin. Many of the ancient letters are evidently the same; and where an apice, or a fulcrum is wanting, he supplies the supposed defect by a dotted line.

In 1781, Faciculus, or a collection of Latin tracts on Swedish antiquities, was published at Stockholm, in six volumes 8vo. edita a Car, Gjorwell, Biblioth. Regio. In this work, specimens of Swedish literature are exhibited, which refer to a very great antiquity. It is here asserted that Odin came from the river Tanais, or Tanaquisl, or Vanaquisl, now the Don; and that he brought letters with him, which Benzelius admits are very much like the old Greek alphabets in number, order, and power. He refers to a work, In Periculo Runico (pag. 29) ubi et schemata tam Ionicarum, quam Runicarum, exhibentur, in which a scheme of fac similes both Ionic and Runic is exhibited. He refers also to Memoires de litterature de l’ Academie des inscriptiones, tome 6. p. 616. He concludes that the alphabet used in the Scandinavian Runes, [mysteries] and on the stones, and sometimes on the contour clefts of Sweden, had emanated from a common fountain with the Cadmuan alphabet; and that those of Odin are found on monuments more ancient than those of Greece.—Tomus 1. Sect. 8.

4. A city, and a tower — Nimrod, the beginning of whose kingdom was Babel, (Genesis 10:10,) is recognized by almost universal tradition as the leader in this movement. His name, which signifies “Let us rebel,” concisely expresses the sentiment of this verse. It was not to escape another deluge, as Josephus imagines, that a lofty tower was to be built, for, had this been the object, a mountain would certainly have been selected for its site rather than a plain; but to establish a conspicuous rallying point, and to erect a strong citadel, whereby the despotic unity at which they aimed could be enforced. They proposed to build a city and a very lofty tower, with its summit in the sky. So the Israelites spoke of the Canaanitish cities as walled up to heaven. Deuteronomy 1:28; 9:1. This hyperbolical expression, passing to the heathen nations, perhaps gave rise to the fable concerning the giants who piled up mountains to scale the heavens and dethrone Jupiter. (Homer, Odys., 11:311, etc.) Let us make us a name — Hebrew, a Shem, perhaps in allusion to Shem who sought renown from God, and refused to engage in their impious schemes. God had promised enduring fame to him, (Genesis 9:26;) they would seek it for themselves. Despotic unity, military power and fame, with the attendant consequences of war, luxury, and slavery, these were the ends of their heaven-defying pride.

V. 5. And the Lord came down to see the city-‘Tis an expression after the manner of men, he knew it as clearly as men know that which they come upon the place to view.

And the tower which the children of men builded-Which speaks, (1.) Their weakness and frailty, it was a foolish thing for the children of men, worms of the earth, to defy heaven. (2.) Their sinfulness, they were the sons of Adam, so it is in the Hebrew; nay, of that Adam, that sinful disobedient Adam, whose children are by nature children of disobedience.

(3.) Their distinction from the children of God, from whom those daring builders had separated themselves, and built this tower to support and perpetuate the separation.

Verse 5. And the Lord came down] A lesson, says an ancient Jewish commentator, to magistrates to examine every evidence before they decree judgment and execute justice.

Verse 5. And the Lord came down to see the city — This is an expression after the manner of men; he knew it as clearly as men know that which they come upon the place to view.

5. The Lord came down — God had familiarly dwelt with man before his fall, but he is here represented as living above and afar, visiting the earth only on occasions of special judgment and mercy. The language here employed is “after the manner of men;” and it is to be noted that it is not only after the manner of men of a simple and primitive age, but of a modern and cultured age as well. All our language concerning God’s actions is, and must be, tropical or figurative. To say that in this case God perceived and judged man’s sin, would sound more appropriate to those who do not think precisely and profoundly; but those who do thus think see that perceive and judge are just as tropical, when applied to God, as come down, see, and say. The tropes are more remote, but equally real. The inspired author would teach that God does not punish without examination.

V. 6. And the Lord said, Behold the people is one, and they have all one language-And if they continue one, much of the earth will be left uninhabited, and these children of men, if thus incorporated, will swallow up the little remnant of God’s children, therefore it is decreed they must not be one.

And now nothing will be restrained from them-And this is a reason why they must be crossed, in their design.

Verse 6. The people is one, &c.] From this, as before observed, we may infer, that as the people had the same language, so they had a unity of design and sentiment. It is very likely that the original language was composed of monosyllables, that each had a distinct ideal meaning, and only one meaning; as different acceptations of the same word would undoubtedly arise, either from compounding terms, or, when there were but few words in a language, using them by a different mode of pronunciation to express a variety of things. Where this simple monosyllabic language prevailed (and it must have prevailed in the first ages of the world) men would necessarily have simple ideas, and a corresponding simplicity of manners. The Chinese language is exactly such as this; and the Hebrew, if stripped of its vowel points, and its prefixes, suffixes, and postfixes separated from their combinations, so that they might stand by themselves, it would nearly answer to this character even in its present state. In order therefore to remove this unity of sentiment and design, which I suppose to be the necessary consequence of such a language, God confounded their language-caused them to articulate the same word differently, to affix different ideas to the same term, and perhaps, by transposing syllables and interchanging letters, form new terms and compounds, so that the mind of the speaker was apprehended by the hearer in a contrary sense to what was intended. This idea is not iii expressed by an ancient French poet, Du Bartas; and not badly, though rather quaintly, metaphrased by our countryman, Mr. Sylvester. Some speak between the teeth, some in the nose, Some in the throat their words do ill dispose—

“Bring me,” quoth one, “a trowel, quickly, quick!”

One brings him up a hammer. “Hew this brick,”

Another bids; and then they cleave a tree;

“Make fast this rope,” and then they let it flee.

One calls for planks, another mortar lacks;

They bear the first a stone, the last an axe.

One would have spikes, and him a spade they give;

Another asks a saw, and gets a sieve.

Thus crossly crost, they prate and point in vain:

What one hath made another mars again.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

These masons then, seeing the storm arrived

Of God’s just wrath, all weak and heart-deprived,

Forsake their purpose, and, like frantic fools,

Scatter their stuff and tumble down their tools.

DU BARTAS.-Babylon.

I shall not examine how the different languages of the earth were formed. It certainly was not the work of a moment; different climates must have a considerable share in the formation of tongues, by their influence on the organs of speech. The invention of new arts and trades must give birth to a variety of terms and expressions. Merchandise, commerce, and the cultivation of the sciences, would produce their share; and different forms of government, modes of life, and means of instruction, also contribute their quota. The Arabic, Chaldee, Syriac, and Æthiopic, still bear the most striking resemblance to their parent, the Hebrew. Many others might be reduced to a common source, yet everywhere there is sufficient evidence of this confusion. The anomalies even in the most regular languages sufficiently prove this. Every language is confounded less or more but that of eternal truth. This is ever the same; in all countries, climates, and ages, the language of truth, like that God from whom it sprang, is unchangeable. It speaks in all tongues, to all nations, and in all hearts: “There is one GOD, the fountain of goodness, justice, and truth. MAN, thou art his creature, ignorant, weak, and dependent; but he is all-sufficient-hates nothing that he has made-loves thee-is able and willing to save thee; return to and depend on him, take his revealed will for thy law, submit to his authority, and accept eternal life on the terms proposed in his word, and thou shalt never perish nor be wretched.” This language of truth all the ancient and modern Babel builders have not been able to confound, notwithstanding their repeated attempts. How have men toiled to make this language clothe their own ideas; and thus cause God to speak according to the pride, prejudice and worst passions of men! But through a just judgment of God, the language of all those who have attempted to do this has been confounded, and the word of the Lord abideth for ever.

Verses 6-9. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, &c. — And if they continue one, much of the earth will be left uninhabited. Let us confound their language — This was not spoken to the angels, as if God needed either their advice or their assistance; but God speaks it to himself, or the Father to the Son. That they may not understand one another’s speech — Nor could they well continue to be united in any undertaking when their tongues were divided; so that this was a proper means, both to take them off from their building, and to dispose them to separate; for if they could not understand one another, they could neither help nor enjoy one another. Accordingly, 1st, Their language was confounded. God, who, when he made man, taught him to speak, now made those builders to forget their former language; and to speak a new one, which yet was the same to those of the same tribe or family, but not to others. We all suffer hereby to this day, in all the inconveniences we sustain by the diversity of languages, and all the trouble we are at to learn the languages we have occasion for; nay, and those unhappy controversies, which are strifes of words, and arise from our misunderstanding of one another’s language, are partly owing to this confusion of tongues. The project of some to frame a universal character, in order to a universal language, how desirable soever it may seem, yet is but a vain thing; for it is to strive against a divine sentence, by which the languages of the nations will be divided while the world stands. As the confounding of tongues divided the children of men, and scattered them abroad, so the gift of tongues bestowed upon the apostles, Acts 2., contributed greatly to the gathering together of the children of God which were scattered abroad, and the uniting of them in Christ, that with one mind and mouth they might glorify God, Romans 15:6. 2d, Their building was stopped. The confusion of their tongues not only disabled them from helping one another, but probably struck a damp upon their spirits, since they saw the hand of the Lord was gone out against them. 3d, The builders were scattered abroad from thence upon the face of the whole earth — They departed in companies, after their families and after their tongues, (Genesis 10:5, 20, 31,) to the several countries and places allotted to them in the division that had been made, which, it seems, they knew before, but would not go to take possession of, till now they were forced to it. So that the very thing which they feared came upon them; that dispersion which they thought to avoid. And they left behind them a perpetual memorandum of their reproach in the name given to the place; it was called Babel, confusion. The children of men were now finally scattered, and never will come all together again till the great day when the Son of man shall sit upon the throne of his glory, and all nations shall be gathered before him, Matthew 25:31, 32. Reader, how wilt thou then appear?

6. This they begin to do — This is only the beginning of their deeds, and if this daring act of impiety be not rebuked, and their far-reaching plans of centralized human power be not frustrated, nothing will be restrained from them, (Hebrews, cut off from them;) that is, there will be no bound or limit to their purposes.

V. 7. Go to, let us go down and there confound their language-This was not spoken to the angels, as if God needed either their advice or their assistance, but God speaks it to himself, or the Father to the Son and Holy Ghost.

That they may not understand one another’s speech-Nor could they well join hands when their tongues were divided: so that this was a proper means, both to take them off from their building, for if they could not understand one another, they could not help one another; and to dispose them to scatter, for when they could not understand one another, they could not enjoy one another. Accordingly three things were done,

1. Their language was confounded. God, who when he made man taught him to speak, now made those builders to forget their former language; and to speak a new one, which yet was the same to those of the same tribe or family, but not to others: those of one colony could converse together, but not with those of another. We all suffer hereby to this day: in all the inconveniences we sustain by the diversity of languages, and all the trouble we are at to learn the languages we have occasion for, we smart for the rebellion of our ancestors at Babel; nay, and those unhappy controversies, which are strifes of words, and arise from our misunderstanding of one another’s languages, for ought I know, are owing to this confusion of tongues. The project of some to frame an universal character in order to an universal language, how desirable soever it may seem, yet I think is but a vain thing for it is to strive against a divine sentence, by which the languages of the nations will be divided while the world stands. We may here lament the loss of the universal use of the Hebrew tongue, which from henceforth was the vulgar language of the Hebrews only, and continued so till the captivity in Babylon, where, even among them, it was exchanged for the Syriac. As the confounding of tongues divided the children of men, and scattered them abroad, so the gift of tongues bestowed upon the Apostles, Acts 2:4-11, contributed greatly to the gathering together of the children of God, which were scattered abroad, and the uniting of them in Christ, that with one mind and mouth they might glorify God, Romans 15:6. (The imagination of a late writer, that God did not confound their tongues, but their religious worship, is grounded on criticisms concerning the meaning of the Hebrew word, which are absolutely false. Beside, would God confound their religious worship? Surely, He is a God of order, and not of confusion.

2. Their building was stopped, they left off to build the city-This was the effect of the confusion of their tongue’s; for it not only disabled them from helping one another, but probably struck a damp upon their spirits, since they saw the hand of the Lord gone out against them.

3. The builders were scattered abroad from thence upon the face of the whole earth-They departed in companies after their families and after their tongues, Genesis 10:5,20,31, to the several countries and places allotted to them in the division that had been made, which they knew before, but would not go to take possession of, ‘till now they were forced to it.

Observe

1. The very thing which they feared came upon them; that dispersion which they thought to evade.

2. That it was God’s work; the Lord scattered them; God’s hand is to be acknowledged in all scattering providences; if the family be scattered, relations scattered, churches scattered, it is the Lord’s doing.

3. That they left behind them a perpetual memorandum of their reproach in the name given to the place; it was called Babel, confusion.

4. The children of men were now finally scattered, and never will come all together again ‘till the great day. when the Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of his glory, and all nations shall be gathered before him, Matthew 25:31,32.

Verse 7. Go to] A form of speech which, whatever it might have signified formerly, now means nothing. The Hebrew העה habah signifies come, make preparation, as it were for a journey, the execution of a purpose, &c. Almost all the versions understand the word in this way; the Septuagint have deute, the Vulgate venite, both signifying come, or come ye. This makes a very good sense, Come, let its go down, &c. For the meaning of these latter words see Genesis 1:26, and Genesis 18:21.

Verses 6-9. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, &c. — And if they continue one, much of the earth will be left uninhabited. Let us confound their language — This was not spoken to the angels, as if God needed either their advice or their assistance; but God speaks it to himself, or the Father to the Son. That they may not understand one another’s speech — Nor could they well continue to be united in any undertaking when their tongues were divided; so that this was a proper means, both to take them off from their building, and to dispose them to separate; for if they could not understand one another, they could neither help nor enjoy one another. Accordingly, 1st, Their language was confounded. God, who, when he made man, taught him to speak, now made those builders to forget their former language; and to speak a new one, which yet was the same to those of the same tribe or family, but not to others. We all suffer hereby to this day, in all the inconveniences we sustain by the diversity of languages, and all the trouble we are at to learn the languages we have occasion for; nay, and those unhappy controversies, which are strifes of words, and arise from our misunderstanding of one another’s language, are partly owing to this confusion of tongues. The project of some to frame a universal character, in order to a universal language, how desirable soever it may seem, yet is but a vain thing; for it is to strive against a divine sentence, by which the languages of the nations will be divided while the world stands. As the confounding of tongues divided the children of men, and scattered them abroad, so the gift of tongues bestowed upon the apostles, Acts 2., contributed greatly to the gathering together of the children of God which were scattered abroad, and the uniting of them in Christ, that with one mind and mouth they might glorify God, Romans 15:6. 2d, Their building was stopped. The confusion of their tongues not only disabled them from helping one another, but probably struck a damp upon their spirits, since they saw the hand of the Lord was gone out against them. 3d, The builders were scattered abroad from thence upon the face of the whole earth — They departed in companies, after their families and after their tongues, (Genesis 10:5, 20, 31,) to the several countries and places allotted to them in the division that had been made, which, it seems, they knew before, but would not go to take possession of, till now they were forced to it. So that the very thing which they feared came upon them; that dispersion which they thought to avoid. And they left behind them a perpetual memorandum of their reproach in the name given to the place; it was called Babel, confusion. The children of men were now finally scattered, and never will come all together again till the great day when the Son of man shall sit upon the throne of his glory, and all nations shall be gathered before him, Matthew 25:31, 32. Reader, how wilt thou then appear?

7. Let us… confound their language — The solemn deliberation and decision of the Triune God is mysteriously intimated in this language. See note on Genesis 1:1, 26. So in the miracle of the Pentecost, which fore-shadowed the restoration of the unity shattered at Babel, CHRIST, at the right hand of the FATHER exalted, shed forth the SPIRIT upon the multitude from “every nation under heaven,” that is, representatives of the whole race.

The language of this verse certainly implies a sudden and miraculous, rather than a gradual and providential, action in the modification of human speech. The mode of such a miracle, as of all miracles, is, of course, inexplicable, for explanation is simply reference to some natural law, and where a miracle is concerned, causes above nature come into action. But the probable character of the miracle may be seen from considering the nature of language. All language, as shown above, can be reduced to some four or five hundred verbal roots, or consonantal combinations — for in the power to produce consonants man’s vocal organs differ essentially from those of brutes — and it was made natural, or instinctive, at creation, for man to produce these sounds to express the elementary ideas, (for example, to produce the sound st to denote fixedness, firmness, etc., as in stand, sto, isthmi, see also on verse 1,) just as the dove instinctively coos and the cock crows to express certain emotions. These roots furnished man’s primary outfit, from which, by manifold modifications, he has developed language. Originally these modifications, to express action, passion, time, manner of action, (voice, mood, tense, etc.,) were the same for all men; but now each family of languages has its own peculiar way of expressing them. The Shemitic family conveys these ideas mainly by internal modifications, interposing sounds between the root letters, the Aryan by external modifications, prefixes, and affixes. This may help us understand where the miraculous stroke fell on human nature at the Babel catastrophe, and thus was the “lip,” the manner of expression, not the essential matter, changed. Historical and geographical philology furnish a most remarkable confirmation of the miracle of Babel. The fixedness and generic persistency of the great linguistic types point to a violent cleavage and projection asunder in the remotest past. The Finnish was in Northern Europe before the Celts arrived, and there it still is. It may perish, but it will never change to Slavonic. The Gaelic survives in a few patches of the British Islands, dwindling slowly away, but while it lives it will ever be Gaelic, it cannot develop into English. It is many centuries since the Shemitic, stretching through the Euphrates valley and the Arabian peninsula, clove the Aryan district asunder. But, as in the days of Solomon, the Sanscrit lay on the east and the Pelasgic on the west of the Hebrew, so to-day the same Sanscrit and its children live in the Indian peninsula, and the children of the Greek and Latin and Teutonic flourish in Europe, while the Arabic, in all its Shemitic integrity, lies between, neither family mingling with the other. (See Lewis, Excursus on Genesis 11.)

Verses 6-9. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, &c. — And if they continue one, much of the earth will be left uninhabited. Let us confound their language — This was not spoken to the angels, as if God needed either their advice or their assistance; but God speaks it to himself, or the Father to the Son. That they may not understand one another’s speech — Nor could they well continue to be united in any undertaking when their tongues were divided; so that this was a proper means, both to take them off from their building, and to dispose them to separate; for if they could not understand one another, they could neither help nor enjoy one another. Accordingly, 1st, Their language was confounded. God, who, when he made man, taught him to speak, now made those builders to forget their former language; and to speak a new one, which yet was the same to those of the same tribe or family, but not to others. We all suffer hereby to this day, in all the inconveniences we sustain by the diversity of languages, and all the trouble we are at to learn the languages we have occasion for; nay, and those unhappy controversies, which are strifes of words, and arise from our misunderstanding of one another’s language, are partly owing to this confusion of tongues. The project of some to frame a universal character, in order to a universal language, how desirable soever it may seem, yet is but a vain thing; for it is to strive against a divine sentence, by which the languages of the nations will be divided while the world stands. As the confounding of tongues divided the children of men, and scattered them abroad, so the gift of tongues bestowed upon the apostles, Acts 2., contributed greatly to the gathering together of the children of God which were scattered abroad, and the uniting of them in Christ, that with one mind and mouth they might glorify God, Romans 15:6. 2d, Their building was stopped. The confusion of their tongues not only disabled them from helping one another, but probably struck a damp upon their spirits, since they saw the hand of the Lord was gone out against them. 3d, The builders were scattered abroad from thence upon the face of the whole earth — They departed in companies, after their families and after their tongues, (Genesis 10:5, 20, 31,) to the several countries and places allotted to them in the division that had been made, which, it seems, they knew before, but would not go to take possession of, till now they were forced to it. So that the very thing which they feared came upon them; that dispersion which they thought to avoid. And they left behind them a perpetual memorandum of their reproach in the name given to the place; it was called Babel, confusion. The children of men were now finally scattered, and never will come all together again till the great day when the Son of man shall sit upon the throne of his glory, and all nations shall be gathered before him, Matthew 25:31, 32. Reader, how wilt thou then appear?

8. Scattered them — Thus, in the days of Peleg, (Genesis 10:25,) was effected the division of the nations. It is possible, however, that the Shemites were not involved in this judgment, and that the primitive Shemitic tongue, from which have descended the Hebrew, Arabic, and Syriac, was the language that came out of the ark. Jewish and Gentile traditions relate that lightning split the tower to its foundations; such embellishments of the history would, however, naturally arise from imagination. The present appearance of the Borsippa tower (see on verse 9) may have given rise to this tradition.

Verse 9. Therefore is the name of it called Babel] lbb babel, from lb bal, to mingle, confound, destroy; hence Babel, from the mingling together and confounding of the projects and language of these descendants of Noah; and this confounding did not so much imply the producing new languages, as giving them a different method of pronouncing the same words, and leading them to affix different ideas to them. Besides Mr. Hutchinson’s opinion, (see Clarke on “Genesis 11:4”,) there have been various conjectures concerning the purpose for which this tower was built. Some suppose it was intended to prevent the effects of another flood, by affording an asylum to the builders and their families in case of another general deluge. Others think that it was designed to be a grand city, the seat of government, in order to prevent a general dispersion. This God would not permit, as he had purposed that men should be dispersed over the earth, and therefore caused the means which they were using to prevent it to become the grand instrument of its accomplishment. Humanly speaking, the earth could not have so speedily peopled, had it not been for this very circumstance which the counsel of man had devised to prevent it. Some say that these builders were divided into seventy-two nations, with seventy-two different languages; but this is an idle, unfounded tale.

Verses 6-9. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, &c. — And if they continue one, much of the earth will be left uninhabited. Let us confound their language — This was not spoken to the angels, as if God needed either their advice or their assistance; but God speaks it to himself, or the Father to the Son. That they may not understand one another’s speech — Nor could they well continue to be united in any undertaking when their tongues were divided; so that this was a proper means, both to take them off from their building, and to dispose them to separate; for if they could not understand one another, they could neither help nor enjoy one another. Accordingly, 1st, Their language was confounded. God, who, when he made man, taught him to speak, now made those builders to forget their former language; and to speak a new one, which yet was the same to those of the same tribe or family, but not to others. We all suffer hereby to this day, in all the inconveniences we sustain by the diversity of languages, and all the trouble we are at to learn the languages we have occasion for; nay, and those unhappy controversies, which are strifes of words, and arise from our misunderstanding of one another’s language, are partly owing to this confusion of tongues. The project of some to frame a universal character, in order to a universal language, how desirable soever it may seem, yet is but a vain thing; for it is to strive against a divine sentence, by which the languages of the nations will be divided while the world stands. As the confounding of tongues divided the children of men, and scattered them abroad, so the gift of tongues bestowed upon the apostles, Acts 2., contributed greatly to the gathering together of the children of God which were scattered abroad, and the uniting of them in Christ, that with one mind and mouth they might glorify God, Romans 15:6. 2d, Their building was stopped. The confusion of their tongues not only disabled them from helping one another, but probably struck a damp upon their spirits, since they saw the hand of the Lord was gone out against them. 3d, The builders were scattered abroad from thence upon the face of the whole earth — They departed in companies, after their families and after their tongues, (Genesis 10:5, 20, 31,) to the several countries and places allotted to them in the division that had been made, which, it seems, they knew before, but would not go to take possession of, till now they were forced to it. So that the very thing which they feared came upon them; that dispersion which they thought to avoid. And they left behind them a perpetual memorandum of their reproach in the name given to the place; it was called Babel, confusion. The children of men were now finally scattered, and never will come all together again till the great day when the Son of man shall sit upon the throne of his glory, and all nations shall be gathered before him, Matthew 25:31, 32. Reader, how wilt thou then appear?

9. Babel — Confusion; lbb, contracted from lblb, derived from the verb llb, to pour together, to confound. (Gesenius.) So the Septuagint. But the local tradition concerning the modern Babil, so generally identified with Babel, is, that it signifies the Gate of Il, that is, Gate of God. Perhaps this name was originally imposed by Nimrod in defiance, and after the judgment described in the text, it changed its meaning, since originally the tower was a symbol of human pride and subsequently of the divine wrath. This would be entirely natural, and both etymologies are equally admissible. What Nimrod meant as a monument of despotic power became a memorial of his discomfiture and shame. It would hardly seem possible that any relics of this ancient structure could now be discovered; but the researches of modern travelers render it highly probable that this edifice was afterwards completed by the kings of Babylon, who have left in the cuneiform inscriptions a record of their work. Oppert, the eminent orientalist, is confident that the modern Birs-Nimrud, at Borsippa, on the west bank of the Euphrates, about six miles from Hillah, is the ruin of this ancient tower, which, he thinks was finished by Nebuchadnezzar, whose name is found stamped upon its bricks, and upon the clay cylinders buried at its angles. It was a temple to Nebo, or Nabu, a deity of the Babylonian kings, whose names are often compounded from Nabu, as Nebuchadnezzar, which was in their orthography Nabu-kuduri-uzur.

Oppert, in his restoration of Babylon, locates this tower near the southwest corner, between the inner and outer walls. At present Birs-Nimrud is a huge pyramidal mound, 153 feet high, rising in solitary grandeur from a vast plain, appearing like a natural hill crowned with a ruin of solid brickwork which rises 37 feet from the summit. This tower-like ruin is rent about halfway down, and vitrified, as if by lightning. Immense masses of fine brickwork, which seem to have been molten, strew the mound, which is wholly composed of the debris of the temple. Its form — an oblong square, the angles facing the four cardinal points — seems to indicate an astronomical or astrological purpose. Aside from what seems to have been the vestibule, the main ruin is about 400 feet square at the base. It was, according to Oppert, the temple of Belus, described by Herodotus (i, 181) as a square pyramid in seven receding stages, coloured so as to represent the seven planetary spheres, each stage 25 feet in height, the whole resting on a vast substructure 75 feet in height, and a stadium, or over 600 feet, square.

Nebuchadnezzar named it the Temple of the Seven Lights of the Earth, that is, the sun, moon, and planets. Herodotus says that the basement stage was coloured black with bitumen, to give it the hue of Saturn, the most distant planet known to the ancients; the next stage orange, or raw sienna, the hue of Jupiter, which was the natural colour of the burnt brick; the third was colored bright red, by the use of half-burnt bricks of a peculiar red clay, the bloody hue of Mars; the fourth was cased with golden plates, to represent the sun; the fifth stage was built of pale yellow bricks, to represent Venus; the sixth was tinted blue, the colour of Mercury, by vitrifying the bricks to a slag; and the seventh was cased in silver, to give it the colour of the moon. (RAWLINSON, Her., App., book 3.) Oppert agrees with the Talmudists in making Borsippa the true site of the tower of Babel, and explains the word as meaning, in Babylonian, Tower of Tongues. But the most remarkable thing of all is the cuneiform inscription here found, as by him deciphered. We extract from Oppert’s note, in Smith’s Dictionary, giving a few lines of the inscription to show its character.

“Nabuchodonosor, king of Babylon, shepherd of peoples, who attests the immutable affection of Merodach, the mighty ruler-exalting Nebo; the saviour, the wise man who lends his ears to the orders of the highest god, the lieutenant without reproach, the repairer of the Pyramid and the Tower, eldest son of Nabopolassar, king of Babylon.

“We say: Merodach, the great master, has created me; he has imposed on me to reconstruct his building. Nebo, the guardian over the legions of the heaven and the earth, has charged my hands with the sceptre of justice.”

Then follows a description of a pyramid that he had built, and then we have this account of the Borsippa edifice: “We say for the other, that is this edifice, the house of the Seven Lights of the Earth, the most ancient monument of Borsippa. A former king built it, (they reckon 42 ages,) but he did not complete its head. Since a remote time people had abandoned it, without order expressing their words. Since that time the earthquake and the thunder had dispersed its sun-dried clay, the bricks of the casing had been split, and the earth of the interior had been scattered in heaps. Merodach, the great lord, excited my mind to repair this building. I did not change the site, nor did I take away the foundation stone,” etc.

The allusion to the Babel catastrophe in the lines italicised is too plain to be mistaken. It is proper to say, in further explanation of this wonderful monument, that this famous King Nebuchadnezzar came to the throne of Babylon in B.C. 604, and built or rebuilt cities, temples, and all manner of public works, on a scale of magnificence unsurpassed in all history. The Generations of Shem, Genesis 11:10-26.

The narrative here again doubles back upon itself, returning over a century to take a new departure from the birth of Shem’s eldest son, two years after the flood. Having described the judgment that scattered the nations, the historian now returns to give at one view the pedigree of Abraham, the heir of the promises made successively to Adam, Seth, Noah, and Shem, and the father of the covenant people. The great post-diluvian rebellion, which gave rise to all the manifold idolatries of the Gentile nations, has been described, to set forth the need of the Abrahamic call and the Israelitish election; in other words, the dark background of the picture has been painted to set forth more vividly the forms of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Judah, to whom the divine artist now turns all his attention. Abraham was the tenth, inclusive, from Shem, and the twentieth from Adam. Important variations from the Hebrew text are here found in the Samaritan and Septuagint, similar to those described in the notes on chap. v, giving rise to two different systems of chronology, the long, or Septuagint, that of Jackson, Hales, etc.; and the short, or Hebrew Masoretic chronology, that of Usher, adopted in our English Bibles. There is also a third system, the Rabbinic, which follows the Hebrew with certain variations. These chronological discrepancies seem, on the whole, to have arisen from arbitrary changes made by the Septuagint translators, although the question will long remain an open one among the most judicious scholars. The Samaritan, also, adds 650 years to the period between the flood and Abraham’s call, by making six of the patriarchs 100 years older, and one of them, Nahor, 50 years older, at the time of begetting the firstborn son. But the Septuagint, in addition to this, interposes another name, Canan, (comp. Luke 3:36,) between Arphaxad and Shelah, making him 130 years old at the birth of Shelah, and also adds 100 years more to the age of Nahor at the time of the birth of Terah, thus increasing the Samaritan period by 230 years, and the Hebrew period by 880 years. By the Hebrew chronology, followed in our English Bibles, it is, then, 422 years from the flood to the time when Abraham entered Canaan, while by the Samaritan it is 1072 years, and by the Septuagint it is 1302 years. Josephus gives minute chronological data, but he cannot be fully harmonized with either of the above systems, or with himself, although it is evident that the Hebrew numbers are the basis of his calculations.

Now since we find by the Peshito and the Targum of Onkelos that the Hebrew text was the same as now up to the time of the Christian era, and since most of the variations above recounted can be accounted for by the supposition of arbitrary changes on the part of translators and transcribers, it seems wise, with our present light, to adhere to the Hebrew chronology. The reasons for so doing may be found well set forth by Murphy in his Commentary, and are also fully given in M’Clintock & Strong’s Cyclopedia, (Art., Chronology.) It is, meanwhile, to be remembered that these chronological facts, although scientifically most important, yet form no essential part of divine revelation.

V. 10. Observe here,

1. That nothing is left upon record concerning those of this line, but their names and ages; the Holy Ghost seeming to hasten thro’ them to the story of Abraham. How little do we know of those that are gone before us in this world, even those that lived in the same places where we live! Or indeed of those who are our contemporaries, but in distant places.

2. That there was an observable gradual decrease in the years of their lives. Shem reached to 600 years, which yet fell short of the age of the patriarchs before the flood; the three next came short of 500, the three next did not reach to 300, and after them we read not of any that attained to 200 but Terah; and not many ages after this, Moses reckoned 70 or 80 to be the utmost men ordinarily arrive at. When the earth began to be replenished, mens lives began to shorten so that the decrease is to be imputed to the wise disposal of providence, rather than to any decay of nature.

3. That Eber, from whom the Hebrews were denominated, was the longest lived of any that were born after the flood; which perhaps was the reward of his strict adherence to the ways of God.

Verse 10. These are the generations of Shem] This may he called the holy family, as from it sprang Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, the twelve patriarchs, David, Solomon, and all the great progenitors of the Messiah. We have already seen that the Scripture chronology, as it exists in the Hebrew text, the Samaritan, the Septuagint, Josephus, and some of the fathers, is greatly embarrassed; and it is yet much more so in the various systems of learned and unlearned chronologists. For a full and rational view of this subject, into which the nature of these notes forbids me farther to enter, I must refer my reader to Dr. Hales’s laborious work, “A New Analysis of Sacred Chronology,” vol. ii., part 1, &c., in which he enters into the subject with a cautious but firm step; and, if he has not been able to remove all its difficulties, has thrown very considerable light upon most parts of it.

Verse 10. Observe here, 1st, That nothing is left upon record concerning those of this line, but their names and ages; the Holy Ghost seeming to hasten through them to the story of Abraham. How little do we know of those who are gone before us in this world, even those that lived in the same places where we live! Or, indeed, of those who are our contemporaries, but in distant places. 2d, That there was an observable gradual decrease in the years of their lives. Shem reached to six hundred years, which yet fell short of the age of the patriarchs before the flood; the three next came short of five hundred, the three next did not reach to three hundred, and after them we read not of any that attained to two hundred but Terah; and not many ages after this Moses reckoned seventy or eighty to be the utmost men ordinarily arrive at. When the earth began to be replenished, men’s lives began to be shortened; so that the decrease is to be imputed to the wise disposal of Providence, rather than to any decay of nature. 3d, That Eber, from whom the Hebrews were denominated, was the longest lived of any that were born after the flood; which perhaps was the reward of his strict adherence to the ways of God.

10. Shem was a hundred years old, and begat Arphaxad two years after the flood — Hence he was ninety-eight years old when he came out of the ark. Comp. Genesis 5:32; 7:11, and notes. The generations to Peleg are repeated from Genesis 10:21-25.

Verse 12. And Arphaxad lived] The Septuagint bring in here a second Cainan, with an addition of one hundred and thirty years. St. Luke follows the Septuagint, and brings in the same person in the same way. But the Hebrew text, both here and in 1 Chronicles 1:1-28, is perfectly silent on this subject, and the best chronologists have agreed in rejecting this as a spurious generation.

Ver. 12. Arphaxad lived thirty five years and begat Salah. The Septuagint reads here, “Arphaxad lived one hundred and thirty five years and begat Cainan;—and Cainan lived one hundred and thirty five years and begat Salah.” Luke 3:36. The rabbins contend that Arphaxad and Cainan are only different names for the same patriarch, which has some appearance of truth from the exact number of 135 years, before Salah, the next princely patriarch was begotten. Yet the chronology of those ancient times cannot be reconciled with the Hebrew Scriptures. Moses in the ninetieth Psalm says, “Thou turnest man to destruction, and sayest, return ye children of men, for a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday.” Whereas the chronology of Usher, as in our bibles, gives but 898 years to the death of Moses. It were desirable that the Chaldaic and the Hebrew chronology could be reconciled perfectly; but as we have fragments only of the Babylonian empire in Ctesias Cnidius, Diodorus Siculus, Æmilius Sura, Castor, and Eusebius, neither Josephus, nor Afficanus, nor Eusebius, nor any of the moderns, as Petavius, Scaliger, Helvicus, Usher, nor Strauchius have been able to effectuate it. Diodorus says “The reinforcements of men sent by the Assyrians, under the command of Memnon, son of Tithon, to the Trojans, deserves also to be remembered here: for under the reign of Teutamus, the twentieth king after Ninyas, the son of Semiramis, who ruled over all Asia, the Greeks engaged in a war against the Trojans under their general Agamemnon, above a thousand years after the Assyrians had been masters of Asia. Eusebius makes the above circumstance a fixed era of his chronology, which is given in the following table, which harmonises Moses, as in the LXX.

KINGS Years

Reigned

Scalinger’s

Julian

Period

OF ASSYRIA AND EVENTS

1. Belus 60 2357 Nimrod, who reigned 62, or 65 years: the first king and builder of Babel.

2. Ninus 52 2412 who conquered most of Asia in 17 years, and built a statue to Belus; hence Baal the idol.—

He crucified Pharnah king of the Medes,

with his wife and children.

3. Semiramis 42 2464 who fought against the Bactrains like a soldier and conquered Medea.

4. Ninyas 38 2506 who attacked the Scythians in Mount

Caucasus.

5. Arius 30 2544

6. Aralius 40 2574 or Aranos.

7. Xerxer,

Balaius

30 2614

8.

Aramamithrus

38 2644

9. Belochus 35 2682 called Biloch

10. Balaius 52 2717

11. Altadus 32 2769 called Sethos by Syncell, in whose reign the hanging gardens were erected.

12.Mamythus 30 2801 or Mamiathus.

13. Mane, Ash 28 2831 or Manchalaios who reigned 30 years.

14. Sphaerus 22 2859 or Itaspheros who reigned according to Callisthienes 20 years.

15. Mamylus 30 2881 or Mamythus

16. Sparthaeus 40 2011

17. Ascatades 38 2953

18. Amyntes 45 2991 Actosai or Atossa, a second Semiramis, flourished after the death of Amyntes.

19. Belochus 2 25 3036 dethroned by Baltetares governor of his gardens.

20. Balatores 30 3061 Baltetares or Bellepares.

21.

Lamprides

30 3091

22. Sosares 20 3121 called Pesares.

23. Lampraes 30 3141 called Lamparos.

24. Panyas 40 3171 called Pannios.

25. Sosarmos 22 3216 surnamed Zeos, that is, god, by adulation.

26. Mithraeus 27 3258 Memmon of gigantic stature born.

27. Teutamu 32 3285 who sent 10,000 Ethiopians to assist Priam against the Greeks. Diodorus 2. c. 17. Troy

was taken in the 22nd year of Mnesteus king

of Athens.

18. Peleg — Division; that is, of the peoples at Babel. At the flood the average duration of human life was shortened nearly one half: Noah, 950; Shem, 600; Arphaxad, 438; Salah, 433; etc. And now, after the Babel catastrophe, it is shortened about one half again: Peleg, 239; Reu, 239; Serug, 230. After the call of Abraham it was shortened again about one fourth: Abraham, 175; Isaac, 180; Jacob, 147. There are, then, three distinct epochs in human longevity, marked by three divine judgments: the deluge, the Babel judgment, and the call of Abram, which left the idolatrous nations to their own ways.

Verse 26. And Terah lived seventy years, and begat Abram, Nahor, and Haran.] Haran was certainly the eldest son of Terah, and he appears to have been born when Terah was about seventy years of age, and his birth was followed in successive periods with those of Nahor his second, and Abram his youngest son. Many have been greatly puzzled with the account here, supposing because Abram is mentioned first, that therefore he was the eldest son of Terah: but he is only put first by way of dignity. An in stance of this we have already seen, Genesis 5:32, where Noah is represented as having Shem, Ham, and Japheth in this order of succession; whereas it is evident from other scriptures that Shem was the youngest son, who for dignity is named first, as Abram is here; and Japheth the eldest, named last, as Haran is here. Terah died two hundred and five years old, Genesis 11:32; then Abram departed from Haran when seventy-five years old, Genesis 12:4; therefore Abram was born, not when his father Terah was seventy, but when he was one hundred and thirty. When any case of dignity or pre-eminence is to be marked, then even the youngest son is set before all the rest, though contrary to the usage of the Scriptures in other cases. Hence we find Shem, the youngest son of Noah, always mentioned first; Moses is mentioned before his elder brother Aaron; and Abram before his two elder brethren Haran and Nahor. These observations are sufficient to remove all difficulty from this place.

26. And Terah lived seventy years, and begat (began at that time to beget) Abram, Nahor, and Haran — Although Abram is mentioned first, as father of the covenant people, as Shem is mentioned first among the sons of Noah, yet Haran was probably the oldest son, begotten when his father was 70 years old. Abram was 75 years old when he left Haran, (Genesis 12:4,) which, according to St. Stephen, (Acts 7:4,) was after Terah’s death. But Terah died in Haran at the age of 205, (verse 32.) Hence Terah must have been at least 130 years old at the time of Abram’s birth. But see note on verse 32. Nahor is here mentioned because he was the ancestor of Rebekah, Leah, and Rachel; and Haran as the father of Lot and Iscah, (Sarah,) all of whom were blended with the covenant people. Shem was ninety-eight years contemporary with Methuselah, who was two hundred and forty-three years contemporary with Adam; so that, if we assume that the genealogy is here completely given, no generations being omitted, there was but one link of tradition through which the story of the creation and of the fall passed over the flood. Shem was, also, one hundred and fifty years contemporary with Abraham, so that the father of the faithful received from an eye-witness the narrative of the flood, and was removed but two generations from the creation; that is, he received the history of events that Adam witnessed and experienced as if from his great-grandfather. The successive links were Adam, Methuselah, Shem, Abraham, thus:

From this plan it is clearly seen that Methuselah was contemporary with Adam from A. M. 687 to 930, and with Shem from 1558 to 1656; and that Abraham was also contemporary with Shem from 2008 to 2158. Thus there was little chance for false tradition.

Generations of Terah, Genesis 11:27-25:11.

V. 27. Here begins the story of Abram. We have here,

1. His country: Ur of the Chaldee’s-An idolatrous country, where even the children of Eber themselves degenerated.

2. His relations, mentioned for his sake, and because of their interest in the following story.

1. His father was Terah, of whom it is said, Joshua 24:2, that he served other gods on the other side the flood; so early did idolatry gain footing in the world. Enough it is said, Genesis 11:26, that when Terah was seventy years old he begat Abram, Nabor and Haran, which seems to tell us that Abram was the eldest son of Terah, and born in the 70th year; yet by comparing Genesis 11:32, which makes Terah to die in his 205th year, with Acts 7:4, where it is said that Abram removed from Haran when his father was dead, and Genesis 12:4, where it is said that he was but 75 years old when he removed from Haran, it appears that he was born in the 130th year of Terah, and probably was his youngest son. We have,

2. Some account of his brethren

(1.) Nahor, out of whole family both Isaac and Jacob had their wives.

(2.) Haran, the father of Lot, of whom it is here said, Genesis 11:28, that he died before his father Terah. ‘Tis likewise said that he died in Ur of the Chaldees, before that happy remove of the family out of that idolatrous country.

(3.) His wife was Sarai, who, tho’ some think was the same with Iscah the daughter of Haran. Abram himself saith, she was the daughter of his father, but not the daughter of his mother, Genesis 20:12.

She was ten years younger than Abram. 3. His departure out of Ur of the Chaldees, with his father Terah, and his nephew Lot, and the rest of his family, in obedience to the call of God. This chapter leaves them in Haran or Charran, a place about the mid-way between Ur and Canaan, where they dwelt ‘till Terah’s head was laid; probably because the old man was unable, through the infirmities of age, to proceed in his journey.

Verse 27. Here begins the story of Abram. We have here, 1st, His country: Ur of the Chaldees — An idolatrous country, where even the children of Eber themselves degenerated. 2d, His relations, mentioned for his sake, and because of their interest in the following story. His father was Terah, of whom it is said, Joshua 24:2, that he served other gods on the other side the flood; so early did idolatry gain footing in the world. His brethren were, Nahor, out of whose family both Isaac and Jacob had their wives; and Haran, the father of Lot, of whom it is here said, verse 28, that he died before his father Terah. It is likewise said that he died in Ur of the Chaldees, before that happy removal of the family out of that idolatrous country. His wife was Sarai, who, some think, was the same with Iscah, the daughter of Haran. Abram himself saith, she was the daughter of his father, but not the daughter of his mother, Genesis 20:12. She was ten years younger than Abram. 3d, His departure out of Ur of the Chaldees, with his father Terah, and his nephew Lot, and the rest of his family, in obedience to the call of God. This chapter leaves them in Haran or Charran, a place about the midway between Ur and Canaan, where they dwelt till Terah’s head was laid; probably because the old man was unable, through the infirmities of age, to proceed in his journey.

27. This heading is properly the beginning of the history of Abraham, which gives account also of the peoples most intimately related to the covenant people. The following plan shows the genealogy of the fathers and mothers of these patriarchal nations, or tribes, as far as it is given in the sacred record:

Thus from Terah sprang not only the Israelitish nation, but also the peoples with whom their history is most intimately blended in the patriarchal times: the Moabites, Ammonites, Edomites, and Ishmaelitish Arabs.

28. Teutaeus 44 3317 called Eutaios. Tyncelle adds here four kings omitted by Eusebius, which occasions a

difference of 116 years between Eusebius and Africanus.

29.

Thinnaeus

30 3523

30. Dercylus 40 3553

MIGRATION FROM UR, 28-32.

28. And Haran died before his father Terah — That is, in the presence of Terah, or it may mean before, as a designation of time, (see Gesenius,) since the phrase refers to both place and time. If Haran were, as we suppose, the eldest son, there is a special reason why his death should here be mentioned. Terah, as the head of the family tribe, adopts Lot, his grandson, in the place of Haran, his son, as heir to the chieftainship, and then, perhaps, saddened at his loss, under a providential leading, resolves to emigrate from his native land. Abram, as we learn from Acts 7:2, had already heard a divine call to break loose from the idolatries that surrounded him, and in which it seems that Terah’s family were involved, for Joshua says to the Israelites: “Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood [Euphrates] in old time… and they served other gods.” Joshua 24:2, note. Ur of the Chaldees — Ur was a city, or district, of the µydck, Kasdim, Kardi, Kurds, or Kaldees, a people not mentioned in the table of nations, Genesis 10, under this name, but whose native name, Accad, as it appears in the Babylonian inscriptions, is mentioned in Genesis 10:10, as designating a city in the land of Shinar, the beginning of the (Hamite) kingdom of Nimrod. The primitive Chaldees were an Hamitic people, descendants of Cush, famous as the builders of the first cities, inventors of alphabetic writing, and discoverers in science, especially in astronomy. The name was afterward applied (as in Daniel) to a sect of astrologers and philosophers, who inherited the science and astrologic arts of the ancient Chaldees, and transmitted them in the Cushite language, although dwelling among Shemitic peoples. These Chaldeans of the time of Daniel were thus a learned aristocracy, who had their schools, corresponding to modern universities, (Strabo, 16:1, 6,) at Orchoe and Borsippa, and also (Pliny, H. N., 11:26) at Babylon and Sippara. Chaldea is the great alluvial plain of the Euphrates and Tigris, stretching from the mountains of Kurdistan to the Persian Gulf, about 400 miles in length, and about 100 in breadth, ascending on the east to the chalky limestone wall of the great table-land of Iran, and descending on the west to the Arabian desert. Covered for many centuries with the mighty cities, and teeming with the vast populations, of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires, the whole plain fertilized through a network of canals branching from the two great arterial rivers, it is now a desert, with swamps and marshes and pools, the dwelling-place of lions and jackals and wolves, although in early spring it seems a wilderness of flowers. The great plain is ridged here and there along the courses of ancient canals, and dotted with mounds of earth-covered ruins, from which now and then a solitary mass of ragged brickwork rises into the malarious air. Ur is supposed by Rawlinson to be the Hur of the Babylonian inscriptions, the modern Mugheir, in lower Chaldea, about six miles west of the Euphrates. Orfa, in upper Chaldea, is a rival site, but this place is too near Haran, being only a day’s journey distant. On the rude bricks of Mugheir are found legends of Urukh, king of Hur, the most ancient inscriptions known, unless it be those of a king called Kadur-mapula, found in the same region, who is likely to have been the Elamite Chedorlaomer of Genesis 14. The ruins of a Chaldean temple dedicated to the moon, built in stages like the Tower of Babel, (see above, p. 162,) and composed of sun-dried and kiln-burnt bricks cemented with bitumen, are yet found at Mugheir, whose inscriptions are deemed by Assyrian scholars to show an antiquity higher than Abram’s call. This venerable temple, now nearly 4,000 years old, when it stood in massive magnificence, a monument of Chaldean idolatry, we may probably regard as the very shrine where the family of Terah worshipped; and they turned away from its splendours at the divine call to wander to a far land, there to dwell in tents for centuries, that they might learn to teach mankind the lessons of the ONE only GOD. Whether Terah himself had these higher motives is doubtful. See on verse 31.

Verse 29. Milcah, the daughter of Haran] Many suppose Sarai and Iscah are the same person under two different names; but this is improbable, as Iscah is expressly said to be the daughter of Haran, and Sarai was the daughter of Terah, and half sister of Abram.

29. Iscah is, by Josephus, (Ant., 1:6,) and by the Jewish writers generally, identified with Sarai or Sarah. If so, Abram married his niece, and Lot was his brother-in-law as well as his nephew. See the plan under verse 27. That Sarah was in some way descended from Terah appears from Abram’s statement to Abimelech, Genesis 20:12, “She is the daughter of my father, but not the daughter of my mother.”

MIGRATION FROM UR, 28-32.

28. And Haran died before his father Terah — That is, in the presence of Terah, or it may mean before, as a designation of time, (see Gesenius,) since the phrase refers to both place and time. If Haran were, as we suppose, the eldest son, there is a special reason why his death should here be mentioned. Terah, as the head of the family tribe, adopts Lot, his grandson, in the place of Haran, his son, as heir to the chieftainship, and then, perhaps, saddened at his loss, under a providential leading, resolves to emigrate from his native land. Abram, as we learn from Acts 7:2, had already heard a divine call to break loose from the idolatries that surrounded him, and in which it seems that Terah’s family were involved, for Joshua says to the Israelites: “Your fathers dwelt on the other side of the flood [Euphrates] in old time… and they served other gods.” Joshua 24:2, note. Ur of the Chaldees — Ur was a city, or district, of the µydck, Kasdim, Kardi, Kurds, or Kaldees, a people not mentioned in the table of nations, Genesis 10, under this name, but whose native name, Accad, as it appears in the Babylonian inscriptions, is mentioned in Genesis 10:10, as designating a city in the land of Shinar, the beginning of the (Hamite) kingdom of Nimrod. The primitive Chaldees were an Hamitic people, descendants of Cush, famous as the builders of the first cities, inventors of alphabetic writing, and discoverers in science, especially in astronomy. The name was afterward applied (as in Daniel) to a sect of astrologers and philosophers, who inherited the science and astrologic arts of the ancient Chaldees, and transmitted them in the Cushite language, although dwelling among Shemitic peoples. These Chaldeans of the time of Daniel were thus a learned aristocracy, who had their schools, corresponding to modern universities, (Strabo, 16:1, 6,) at Orchoe and Borsippa, and also (Pliny, H. N., 11:26) at Babylon and Sippara. Chaldea is the great alluvial plain of the Euphrates and Tigris, stretching from the mountains of Kurdistan to the Persian Gulf, about 400 miles in length, and about 100 in breadth, ascending on the east to the chalky limestone wall of the great table-land of Iran, and descending on the west to the Arabian desert. Covered for many centuries with the mighty cities, and teeming with the vast populations, of the Assyrian and Babylonian empires, the whole plain fertilized through a network of canals branching from the two great arterial rivers, it is now a desert, with swamps and marshes and pools, the dwelling-place of lions and jackals and wolves, although in early spring it seems a wilderness of flowers. The great plain is ridged here and there along the courses of ancient canals, and dotted with mounds of earth-covered ruins, from which now and then a solitary mass of ragged brickwork rises into the malarious air. Ur is supposed by Rawlinson to be the Hur of the Babylonian inscriptions, the modern Mugheir, in lower Chaldea, about six miles west of the Euphrates. Orfa, in upper Chaldea, is a rival site, but this place is too near Haran, being only a day’s journey distant. On the rude bricks of Mugheir are found legends of Urukh, king of Hur, the most ancient inscriptions known, unless it be those of a king called Kadur-mapula, found in the same region, who is likely to have been the Elamite Chedorlaomer of Genesis 14. The ruins of a Chaldean temple dedicated to the moon, built in stages like the Tower of Babel, (see above, p. 162,) and composed of sun-dried and kiln-burnt bricks cemented with bitumen, are yet found at Mugheir, whose inscriptions are deemed by Assyrian scholars to show an antiquity higher than Abram’s call. This venerable temple, now nearly 4,000 years old, when it stood in massive magnificence, a monument of Chaldean idolatry, we may probably regard as the very shrine where the family of Terah worshipped; and they turned away from its splendours at the divine call to wander to a far land, there to dwell in tents for centuries, that they might learn to teach mankind the lessons of the ONE only GOD. Whether Terah himself had these higher motives is doubtful. See on verse 31.

Verse 31. They went forth-front Ur of the Chaldees] Chaldea is sometimes understood as comprising the whole of Babylonia; at other times, that province towards Arabia Deserta, called in Scripture The land of the Chaldeans. The capital of this place was Babylon, called in Scripture The beauty of the Chaldees’ excellency, Isaiah 13:19. Ur appears to have been a city of some considerable consequence at that time in Chaldea; but where situated is not well known. It probably had its name Ur rwa, which signifies fire, from the worship practised there. The learned are almost unanimously of opinion that the ancient inhabitants of this region were ignicolists or worshippers of fire, and in that place this sort of worship probably originated; and in honour of this element, the symbol of the Supreme Being, the whole country, or a particular city in it, might have had the name Ur. Bochart has observed that there is a place called Ouri, south of the Euphrates, in the way from Nisibis to the river Tigris. The Chaldees mentioned here had not this name in the time of which Moses speaks, but they were called so in the time in which Moses wrote. Chesed was the son of Nahor, the son of Terah, Genesis 22:22. From Chesed descended the Chasdim, whose language was the same as that of the Amorites, Daniel 1:4; 2:4. These Chasdim, whence the caldaioi, Chaldeans, of the Septuagint, Vulgate, and all later versions, afterwards settled on the south of the Euphrates. Those who dwelt in Ur were either priests or astronomers, Daniel 2:10, and also idolaters, Joshua 24:2, 3, 14, 15. And because they were much addicted to astronomy, and probably to judicial astrology, hence all astrologers were, in process of time, called Chaldeans, Daniel 2:2-5.

The building of Babel, the confusion of tongues, and the first call of Abram, are three remarkable particulars in this chapter; and these led to the accomplishment of three grand and important designs: 1. The peopling of the whole earth; 2. The preservation of the true religion by the means of one family; and 3. The preservation of the line uncorrupted by which the Messiah should come. When God makes a discovery of himself by a particular revelation, it must begin in some particular time, and be given to some particular person, and in some particular place. Where, when, and to whom, are comparatively matters of small importance. It is God’s gift; and his own wisdom must determine the time, the person, and the place. But if this be the case, have not others cause to complain because not thus favoured? Not at all, unless the favouring of the one for a time should necessarily cut off the others for ever. But this is not the case. Abram was first favoured; that time, that country, and that person were chosen by infinite wisdom, for there and then God chose to commence these mighty operations of Divine goodness. Isaac and Jacob also received the promises, the twelve patriarchs through their father, and the whole Jewish people through them. Afterwards the designs of God’s endless mercy were more particularly unfolded; and the word, which seemed to be confined for two thousand years to the descendants of a single family, bursts forth on all hands, salvation is preached to the Gentiles, and thus in Abram’s seed all the nations of the earth are blessed.

Hence none can find fault, and none can have cause to complain; as the salvation which for a time appeared to be restricted to a few, is now on the authority of God, liberally offered to the whole human race! GENESIS

31. Eupacmes 38 3593 or Eupalos.

32. Lausthenes 45 3631

33. Pyritiades 30 3676

34. Ophrataeus 21 3706

35. Ephachares 52 3727 or Ophratenes.

36. Ocrazeres 42 3779 or Acrazapes, or Acracarnes.

37.

Sardanapalus

19 3821 or Tonos Concoleros; Arbactus governor of

Medea revolted, and after some years of

The years are 1300 3841 war Nineveh was taken in the 29th year of king Josiah. Thus Eusebius agrees with

Justin, that the Assyrian Empire continued

1300 years, which, allowing for the

uncertainty of the times, agrees in the main

with Moses.

Ver. 28. Haran died—in Ur of the Chaldees. St. Jerome says that Abraham set fire to the house of the idols, and that Haran perished in the flames while endeavouring to save his gods. The name of Ur, meaning fire, is probably a surname given to Haran, like that of Peleg, because he worshipped fire. The Lord did indeed accept offerings by fire from heaven, but it argued the most vain and foolish imagination in the magi to worship fire, as in the Egyptians to worship a bull. On this subject Herodotus says in Thalia, “The Persians account fire to be a god; and for that reason neither the Persians nor the Egyptians burn the bodies of the dead, but salt and embalm them, lest they should be eaten of worms.” This worship is still kept up. In the year 1818 Mr. Homer, missionary at Bombay, attended the festival of fire worship, fifty miles from Bombay, which is celebrated in the woods every four years, and continues for the space of five days. About fifty thousand people assembled. They dug holes in the earth to admit the air, and kindled over them large fires; and having hung the branches of trees with lamps, they commenced singing, dancing, and drinking; and it is awful to add, both sexes, from ten to seventy years of age, indulged in undisguised shame.

Ver. 31. They came to Haran, a town so called from the patriarch, as also the river on whose shores he had lived.

31. Terah took — Terah, the patriarch of the tribe, here appears as the leader of this movement. In this memorable emigration the divine and the human are seen to co-operate and interact, as in the case of all the great movements of Providence. Natural causes, and even selfish human motives, are taken up into the divine plan. So God uses the avarice of Laban (chap. 31) to bring Jacob back again into Canaan; the envy of Joseph’s brethren to plant Israel in Egypt, (Genesis 45:8;) and the tyrannical cruelty of Pharaoh to transfer them to their final home. In this history, and in the heathen traditions, we see other traces of westward movements from the Mesopotamian plain and the Asiatic table-land around the desert and down the Jordan valley to the Mediterranean shore. Warlike expeditions from beyond the Tigris. as we see from chapter 14, had already brought the kings of the vale of Siddim under tribute to the king of Elam. Shemitic tribes were at this same time pressing westward and southward into the Arabian peninsula, and the Arameans were ascending the Euphrates and settling in Eastern Syria. The migration of Terah and his tribe was thus a part of a general movement of the Shemitic people, settling towards the Mediterranean from the east, divinely guided so as to rescue a branch of that people from the prevailing idolatry, and bless, in their old age, the nations of the earth. They went forth with them — That is, Lot and Sarai, the two just previously mentioned, went forth with Terah and Abram. To go into the land of Canaan — There is no indication that Terah had any other than secular motives, but St. Stephen tells us in Acts 7:2, that Abram had already received a divine call. The tribe, with their dependents and cattle, moved slowly up the Mesopotamian plain, intending to advance northward, around the desert, and then south-westerly into the land of Canaan, but arriving in the vicinity of Haran, (Charran of the New Testament, the Carrhae of the Greeks and Romans,) and encamping there, perhaps the advancing infirmities of the aged Terah prevented his moving farther, and so they… dwelt there till Terah was dead. Acts 7:4. Then the migration continued, under the leadership of Abram. But more probably we are to understand the text to state that Terah started on the expedition which terminated in Canaan, that is, which Abram continued to Canaan, although Terah himself had not this issue in mind when he left Ur of the Chaldees. This harmonizes better with Genesis 12:1, “Unto the land that I will show thee,” implying that the particular land was not then made known to Abram, and also with Paul’s language, in Hebrews 11:8, “and he went out, not knowing whither he went.” Haran, or Charran, in north-west Mesopotamia, on the stream Belilk, a little affluent of the Euphrates, situated in a large plain surrounded by mountains, was a natural halting-place for caravans, being but a very little out of the direct route to Canaan, and the point whence diverged the great caravan routes to the fords of the Euphrates and Tigris. There was once here a temple of the moon goddess, as in Ur. The city is remarkable in Roman history as the scene of the defeat of Crassus. It had quite a population under the caliphs, but is now a ruined village, inhabited by a few Arabs.

32. Two hundred and five years — We see, from Genesis 12:4, that Abram was seventy-five years old when he left Haran. If now he remained in Haran till Terah’s death, then Terah must have been at least one hundred and thirty years old at the time of Abram’s birth, since 205-75=130. But this does not seem likely, since Abram regards it a miraculous thing that he should be a father at one hundred, (Genesis 17:17,) and this surprise at the divine promise is unaccountable if he were himself born when his father was one hundred and thirty. But the narrative allows us to suppose that Abram left Haran some years before Terah’s death, the history of Terah being finished up in this chapter, and the narrative then doubling back upon itself to resume the history of Abram. The only difficulty in this interpretation is, that we find St. Stephen, in his discourse, (Acts 7:4,) assuming that Abram remained in Haran till the death of Terah. In this, however, Stephen, as we see from Philo, followed a Jewish tradition, which was probably erroneous. We do not certainly know in what year of Terah’s life Abram was born.