110 Andreas Hock “comes down out of heaven” towards the earth, Rev 21,2, against the backdrop of a recreated heaven and earth. The third initial contact between the two texts is the locale. Those pre- abrahamic tribes, as they journeyed from the east, Gen 11,2, came upon a plain in the land of Shinar, Gen 10,10 (i.e., Babylonia; cf. Rev 17). They had not gone far from Paradise, still on their journeys in the east, as repopulating took place after the ravages of the deluge. Their decision to settle contravenes the divine intent to settle people in various lands. Contrary to the plain, the visionary of Patmos observes the descent of the New Jerusalem from the vantage point of a high mountain, Rev 21,10, recalling Exod 19,11 and Ezek 40,2: a traditional site of theophanies in the Old Testament (4) (unlike the ejrhmo", “desert”, in Rev 17,3). This mountain is a symbol that allows for no topographical precision. What we notice at this introductory stage is that the textual contacts between Genesis and the Apocalypse are related, yes, but in an order of dissimilarity and/or inversion. Having said that, let us now systematically compare some of the salient components of both narratives. 1. From Deu'te (Gen 11,3.4) to Deu'ro (Rev 21,9) In Gen 11,3 the settlers call upon one another with the imperative “Come (hb;h;, deu'te), let us make bricks!”, and in 11,4 “Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens! And let us make a name for ourselves!” This triple incitement points to the people’s resolve to take the initiative in their egocentric quest. They state their purpose: the sacred writer focuses on their motivations, not on what they build. Instead of asking for divine guidance and approval they imagine that they can decide on their own what is best for them. They prefer to be independent of their Maker. The human plan and divine intent are effectively set in opposition by “Come, let us make bricks”, and “Come (deu'te), let us go down and there confuse their language”, 11,7. Contrary to this anthropocentric scheme is the picture of one of the seven angels bearing vials and approaching the seer on Patmos, Rev 21,9-10, and gently bidding him: “Come (deu'ro), I will show you the Bride, the Wife of the Lamb!” This imperative comes through the angel from God, as it were. The enterprise here is divine, while the project has a theanthropic scope, i.e., divine and human: the Holy City. Looking back over the above, one notices a sharp contraposition between the human aspiration of the campaign of the people of Babel on the one hand, and the transcendent undertaking regarding the New Jerusalem on the other. True and lasting communion of humankind with God can only be God’s initiative, and not ours. 2. From oijkodomhvswmen eJautoi'" (Gen 11,4) to skhnh; tou' qeou (Rev 21,3) We now turn to the expression in Gen 11,4, “Let us build for ourselves”: The Septuagint well translates the Hebrew original WnL;Ahn