4. Babel and the confusion of tongues.
Gen. 11: 1–9 records a very remarkable event, of far reaching consequences toward the geographical diffusion of the race. Up to this point there was but one language—as the record has it—“one lip and one set of words,” “lip” being (perhaps) used for the mode of speaking, including pronunciation and possibly inflection; while words are the matter of language, the roots or ground-forms. The fact that the latter have been far less variable than the former, appearing to some extent in all subsequent ages throughout all the diversities of human tongues, favors this distinction.
Migrating from the Armenian hill country where the ark rested, Noah’s posterity reached the fertile plain of Shinar, halted there, and set themselves to the building of a magnificent and lofty tower. There being no stone at hand, they prepared brick, not sun-dried after the common Oriental method, but thoroughly burned for greater durability. As both consequence and proof of this durability, the supposed ruins of this great tower, known as “Birs Nimrood” [tower of Nimrod] are still extant within the area of ancient Babylon, silently witnessing alike to the labors of those fathers of the nations before their dispersion, and to the truthfulness of this sacred record.
This tower was not built for safety in case of another flood (as some have supposed) for, with such an object, a high mountain and not a plain would have been chosen for the site; it could at best have saved but few; and more than all, the record gives a very different view of the motive. This motive was consolidation—the aggregation of the masses into one vast nationality or kingdom—a thought due to the ambition of some controlling minds aspiring to power, distinction, fame. Foreseeing the tendency to dispersion they sought to forestall it, to find their own glory in having a multitude under their sway and in building monuments that could not perish. For wise reasons God blasted this scheme. Precisely what divine influence was interposed to confound the language of these men, Idoubt if it is possible for us to know certainly. It is supposable that the many became restive under the domination of the few and the severe labor of this enterprise, so that diverse counsels and dissolving social bonds had some influence in blocking the progress of the work. Misunderstandings sprung up and found expression in diversities of tongue. What could be more natural when harmony gave place to discord? So this huge tower-building was arrested and men scattered abroad as they would.——The new tongues which took their rise here had ample opportunity to diverge more and more widely in subsequent ages. The immense variety in language which the history of the world discloses has been a growth—the product of subtle causes, of segregation and non-intercourse in part, and in part also no doubt of diverse mental traits and various influences of culture.
What the original language was, common to the race up to this point, has been much debated by learned men without arriving at uniform and satisfactory results. Whether it was, as some suppose, the veritable Hebrew tongue; or as others think, the Aramaic, i. e. the Chaldee; or whether it is utterly lost—these are the alternatives; but for the choice between them we can have no very positive data. Those descendants of Noah who best preserved the religious faith of the fathers would stand most aloof from the scenes of Babel, and be naturally least affected by its many-tongued controversies and its resulting confusion of speech. That they escaped these influences altogether is perhaps too much to assume.——That the Aramaic (Chaldee) tongue, closely allied to the Hebrew, held its place for ages in the valley of the Euphrates, strongly favors its claim to be, if not the very tongue of Noah, at least of the same family.——These points suggest probabilities but fall short of certainty.
CHAPTER X.
ABRAHAM.
ABRAHAM is one of the great men in the world’s religious history. Why he is so can not be well understood and appreciated without at least a brief view of the state of the world religiously considered at the date of his call, and the demand thence resulting for the new religious instrumentalities of which Abraham was in a sort “the head-center.”
In the age before the flood religion had never really flourished. We read of a time when “men began to call on the name of the Lord,” and something approximating toward system and concentration appears to have been introduced. But the record is silent as to any marked result except so far as it may appear in the piety of individual men, e. g. Enoch and Noah. Apparently the religious element failed even to hold its own against the on-rushing tides of worldliness. Even the sons of godly fathers formed unhallowed marriage connections, and consequently were borne rapidly down the broad current of degeneracy and moral corruption till only one family remained to represent the piety of all that generation. There was a fatal lack of moral forces.——The flood was a vigorous moral lesson in itself; and besides this, the race started afresh from the seed of this one pious family. Ten generations bring us to Abraham in Ur of the Chaldees, near the old cradle of the race. The history of religion during this period from Noah to Abraham is exceedingly meager. Gathering up the few fragmentary notices which emerge from the general darkness in the age of Abraham, we find that his father’s family in ancient Ur “served other gods” (Josh. 24: 2); that Abraham, journeying toward the south country of Palestine, sojourned awhile in Gerar and was there drawn into grave temptation by the apparent godlessness of the people, since he apologizes on this wise for representing Sarah to be his sister and not his wife: “Because Ithought, Surely the fear of God is not in this place; and they will slay me for my wife’s sake” (Gen. 20: 10, 11). The same temptation befell him previously in Egypt (Gen. 12: 10–20)—probably indicating the same inward thought based on the same apparent public morality. Then we have the horrible wickedness of Sodom and Gomorrah where not ten righteous men could be found. And sad to say, we see a very low tone of religious and moral life in the family even of Lot, who as the nephew and special associate of Abraham should represent the better elements of society.——Akin to these special facts is the general one that the personal history of Abraham through a full century of somewhat extensive travels and various experience brings him into contact with God-fearing men in only the single case of Melchizedek. Apart from this one brief but wonderful interview (Gen. 14: 18–20) the recorded history of Abraham gives the impression of a godly man working his way for the most part alone, amid godless people on every hand—alone save as the Lord testifies of him—“I know him that he will command his children and his household after him and they shall keep the way of the Lord to do justice and judgment” (Gen. 18: 19).——The case of Melchizedek, “a priest of the Most High God” and also “king of Salem”—a man so venerable in piety, in personal presence apparently, in power and in years, that even Abraham received his blessing and “gave him tithes of all”—this is the one sole bright spot on the otherwise dark religious life of the world as known through the history of Abraham. We marvel that Abraham, so far as appears, never met Melchizedek before and never saw him again. It seems strange that two such men, so kindred in character and spirit, each almost alone breasting the strong currents of prevailing wickedness, should not have formed at least an infant Christian Association to stand by each other and bring their joint light to a common focus in the midst of the world’s deep and far spreading moral darkness. But God had a certain great plan to bring out with Abraham and his own way of doing it. It is plain there was need of this new plan. The cause of piety and truth was in peril and called for some “new departure”—some yet untried method and power. The worldwas waiting for some Abraham—i. e. for just the system of which the great and godly Abraham was the prominent figure and the historic representative.