Andreas Hock, «From Babel to the New Jerusalem (Gen 11,1-9 and Rev 21,1–22,5)», Vol. 89 (2008) 109-118
There are some salient points of contact between the narrative of Babel, Gen 11:1-9, and the vision of the New Jerusalem, Rev 21:1–22:5. These parallels are starkly contrastive. Among the most stunning parallels are the way man’s initiative is
underscored in Gen, while God’s initiative is emphasized in Rev. Human accomplishment appears to be at the heart of the narrative in Genesis, whereas God’s accomplishment is presented in Rev. Moreover, worldly reputation is set in
opposition to heavenly fame, as well as a worldwide dispersion in Gen as it is being contrasted with a worldwide unification in Rev. The essay’s conclusion is that the protological text is brought to fulfillment in the eschatological one in an inverse archetypal sense.
From Babel to the New Jerusalem
(Gen 11,1-9 and Rev 21,1–22,5)
It is a well known truism for Christians that the Old Testament is revealed in
the New Testament. Many an author has specifically argued that the
protological texts of the first book of the Bible find their fulfilment in the
eschatological texts of the last book of Scripture. A comparative reading of the
apocalyptic vision of the New Jerusalem descending from heaven (Rev
21,1–22,5) and of the narrative of the city/tower of Babel (Gen 11,1-9) brings
to the fore a number of stunning parallels.
No commentator has offered any further illumination on the archetypal
relationship between those two cities (1). And so, the intent of this study is to
confront the project of Babel, Gen 11,1-9, with the Holy City, Rev 21,1–22,5,
seeking to shed more light on this link. Obviously, we will have to be selective
in our choice of parallels given the literary limitations of the present
exposition. Methodologically speaking, we will compare the two texts from a
synchronic and biblico-theological angle.
For a background it is beneficial to understand that Gen 11,1-9 aims to
construe the diversity of peoples and languages as a chastisement for a
collective sin of pride. Since all peoples were descended from the family of
Noah, linguistic diversity required some explanation, i.e. how unity could be
transformed into disunity. Nations sinned by refusing to go forth to possess
their lands, preferring instead to band together and build a prideful city at a
site of their own choosing (2). The divine intent that the race “scatterâ€, or repair
to their God-given lands, is repeated in 9,19; 10,5.20.25.31.32. Textually
speaking, Gen 11,1-9 employs a restricted vocabulary (hp;c;, “languageâ€,
appears five times in these few lines), and uses a symmetrical narrative
device (3).
Let us just take stock of some initial points of comparison as we approach
the subject. First, Gen 11,1 mentions the uniformity of language on earth;
11,2, then illustrates the migration of peoples toward the earth of Shinar,
before they were scattered over all the earth, 11,4.8.9. By contrast, Rev 20,1
describes the definitive “flight†(ejfugen) of that former land, and the
appearance of the “new earth†in Rev 21,1. This new creation now becomes
the stage of God’s definitive covenant with humankind. Everything seems
arranged for the appearance of the New Jerusalem.
Secondly, there is a movement indicated in both texts: while the peoples
migrate “from the east†presumably toward the west, Gen 11,2, the Holy City
(1) A. Vögtle merely mentions the connection between the two realities: “Er [John] hat
zugleich den Turmbau von Babel als negatives Ur- und Vorbild der Himmelsstadt im Augeâ€
(Das Buch mit sieben Siegeln. Die Offenbarung des Johannes in Auswahl gedeutet
[Freiburg 1981] 177).
(2) Cf. R. BROWN. – J. FITZMYER – R. MURPHY (eds.), The New Jerome Biblical
Commentary (Englewood Cliffs, NJ 1990) 17.
(3) Cf. D. COTTER, Genesis (Collegeville, PA 2003) 67.
FOLLOW US