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 111
reflexive pronoun eJautoi'", “for usâ€, betrays a deep-rooted anthropocentric
ambition. They desire to be the sole architects of a city/tower meant to serve
only those settlers, and thought to satisfy their presumptuous desire for fame
and glory. One senses something of the pride of these builders, seeking as it
were to rival the supremacy of the Creator of all. But besides than
transgressing the limits of their creatureliness in attempting to usurp the place
of God, their building also constitutes a bid to secure their own future in
isolation, a challenge to God’s command to fill the earth. They understep
rather than overstep their human limits.
A glance at the apocalyptic text makes the reader aware of an antithetical
difference. The object of John’s vision is not the making of that heavenly City.
Its static existence is perceived first, then its dynamic descending movement,
thirdly its transit through the heavenly sphere, then its gigantic dimension set
against the background of a new cosmos (5), and lastly its origin in God.
Various phrases stress the pristine newness of a city not made by man, Rev
21,2 (th;n povlin th;n aJgivan ∆Ierousalh;m kainhvn), adorned by God, 21,2
(kekosmhmevnhn) (6), inhabited by God, Rev 21,3 (hJ skhnh; tou' qeou'), and
possessing the glory of God, Rev 21,11 (e[cousan th;n dovxan tou' qeou'). The
visionary expresses its holiness and newness by the help of two adjectives,
aJgivan and kainhvn (7). Therefore, the distinctive feature here is the City’s
newness, which can be gathered from the postponing of the adjective similar
to Rev 21,1a (8): a peculiar emphasis is put on the divine, not human, origin.
Intertextually pertinent is the covenantal connotation of hJ skhnhv tou' qeou'
meta; tw'n ajnqrwvpwn as a hapax in the entire Bible (9) with its nearest analogous
occurrences in Josh 24,25; 1 Chr 6,33; Num 10,3; 2 Chr 1,5. As an innuendo
to Exod 27,21; 31,7; Num 7,89; 9,15; Matt 8,20; 17,4; Joh 1,14; Act 7,44; Heb
8,2; 9,8.11, it amalgamates ‘tent’, ‘God’ and ‘humankind’: human beings are
God’s property, particularly those who are written in the book of life, Rev
20,15. Hence, all those who do not fall under the category of Rev 20,14 will
live with God. Does skhnhv refer to the City only or to the entire creation? The
context leaves no doubt that it aims in the first place at the descending
Jerusalem, because of its immediately antecedent mention. Yet the new
heaven and earth cannot be categorically excluded.
(5) M. Rissi regards the New Jerusalem as a part of the new world, or rather its
substantial form, cf. The Future of the World. An Exegetical Study of Revelation
19,11–22,15 (SBT 23; London 1972) 57.
(6) Syntactically speaking, the perfect participles in Rev 21,2b mean both anteriority
and contemporaneity with regard to the main verb ei\don, indicating that the City has been
embellished prior to her descent.
(7) Cf. the “new nameâ€, Rev 2,17; 3,12; the “new songâ€, Rev 5,9; 14,3. While the
Greek adjective nevo" means ‘fresh, anew’, the adjective kainov" signals an up to date
undisclosed newness, cf. J. SWEET, Revelation (TPI New Testament Commentaries; London
– Philadelphia 1990) 297; “Thus he is not speaking of a new Jerusalem that will supersede
the fallen one, but of a new Jerusalem, that will be both the restoration of that city and
something far greaterâ€. C.G. GONZÃLEZ – J.L. GONZÃLEZ, Revelation (Westminster Bible
Companion; Louisville, KY 1997) 138.
(8) Unlike in Rev 3,12.
(9) “Auffällig ist das universal gefaßte ‘bei den Menschen’, das die parallelen
alttestamentlichen Stellen nicht kennen (Ez 37,27; Lev 26,11; Sach 2,14)†(U.B. MÜLLER,
Die Offenbarung des Johannes (ÖTBK 19; Würzburg 1984) 350.