114 Andreas Hock to encounter the human race, to unite Himself with man (21). Remarkable is the colossal inclusio between Rev 3,12 and 21,2, effecting a relationship of promise and climactic fulfillment, of a final completion of all revelation. Again, the comparison of Gen and Rev illustrates the axiomatic difference between the human endeavor to presumptuously trespass God’s heavenly sphere in Babel and the descent from God of a New City that brings to fulfillment the Incarnational event of the Son of God (22). 5. From poihvswmen eJautoi'" o[noma (Gen 11,4) to ojnovmata ejpigegrammevna (Rev 21,12) Then we see the settlers of Shinar animate one another, saying: “Come, let us make a name for ourselves!” Is this not one more instance of human disobedience (cf. Gen 2–3; 4,1-9; 6,1-8), the refusal to accept one’s place as a human in the universe under God, invoking and magnifying His name? Abraham will be told by God, in contrast, “I will make your name great”, Gen 12,2; and a further reversal occurs when God makes David’s name great, 2 Sam 7,9.29. The hint of blasphemy throughout the narrative, however, turns on the synonymy between the verb “to make” (poihvswmen eJautoi'" o[noma), used for building the tower and the term of divine creation. For the sake of comparison let us again turn to the vision of the New Jerusalem, Rev 21,12-14: “It has a great, high wall with twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and on the gates are inscribed the names of the twelve tribes of the Israelites [...]. And the wall of the city has twelve foundations, and on them are the twelve names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb”. Therefore, those names are not given by man but by God (23). They represent His design of history and eternity (24); they are meant to honor those who have followed the Lamb wherever He went. Ultimately, those names redound to God’s own glory. Consequently, the prideful project of human beings desirous of self- exaltation and self-glorification was to be a failure, whereas the humility and self-forgetfulness of the followers of the Lamb is eternally rewarded by God. (21) There is an intertextual difference between the Hebrew tradition where people go to meet the final City, and Revelation where this City comes to meet people. (22) “Jerusalem has become the meeting point between heaven and earth”. W.J. DUMBRELL, The End of the Beginning. Revelation 21–22 and the Old Testament (Moore Theological College Lecture Series 1983; Grand Rapids, MI 1985) 31. (23) See also the new name given to the victor, Rev 2,17. (24) The fact that the names of the apostles are inscribed on the foundations and those of the sons of Israel on the gates, seems to indicate the seer’s intention to signal the return of Israel into the salvation community on the basis of the faith of the apostles. Chronologically it would appear to be more coherent if the tribes of Israel were on the City foundations and the names of the apostles on the gates. Yet theologically, the apostles are the real foundation of the Church as the people of God, and only through them the Old Covenant people enter the City. To counterbalance this sequence, Israel is mentioned first. Hence, Old and New Testament are ingeniously joined. Hence, the historical and the descriptive order stand in inverse position.