This series “The Tower of Babel” is part of the Section “God and Man Learning to Work Together – The Journey Begins” and consists of fourteen posts. The series proposes new explanations for why God destroyed the Tower of Babel.

Review of the previous post

The previous post, Number 10 of 14, was the seventh of seven posts presenting some possible explanations for the God’s destruction of the Tower of Babel.

Preview of this post

This post, Number 11 of 14 provides a theocentric explanation for the God’s destruction of the Tower of Babel.

1. A theocentric explanation
2. Introduction

None of the above explanations is entirely acceptable. Therefore, another explanation for the destruction of an edifice which seems to be congruous with goals set for the human race. In order to find an explanation that is satisfactory, the explanation must account for the remainder of the Genesis story as well as be theocentered.

B Diversity is desirable

As discussed above, it would appear that God would want everyone to speak the same language to avoid misunderstandings which result from different languages; however, based on the story of the Tower of Babel, this does not appear to the be case. Accordingly, there must be another, overriding, consideration. This section of the essay will propose a reason.

Diversity as represented by diversity in language, is required for man to exercise his imagination and fulfill his mission as provided in Genesis

As discussed in the series “Imagination and the Mind of Man,” it could be argued that the Tower of Babel was destroyed because it was intended to make all mankind uniform (“else we shall be scattered all over the world” Genesis 11:4) thereby destroying diversity and choice, hence hindering the exercise, and growth, of man’s imagination. Which is why this episode concludes with the verse:  “Thus, the LORD scattered them from there over the face of the whole earth.” Genesis 11:8. It thus could be argued that God wanted diversity so there would be choices since He had given humans the tools to make choices: free will and imagination to exercise choices associated with free will. God has entrusted His great creation to the exercise of man’s imagination, our free will and to our memory for safekeeping and our abilities to exercise our free will, learn lessons and apply those learned lessons to current and/or future problems.

Thus, a possible explanation might be that God wanted diversity so there will be a range of views, ideas and voices for any issue whereby men can have a wide range of choices to imagine consequences for any decision^[1]. Having a great number of options to choose from and envisioning a great number of potential consequences will increase the chances of making the correct decision. Language is a primary contributor to differences in view, ideas and the like. Hence, one explanation for this episode will be God’s desire to ensure diversity and thereby provide a wide range of possible consequences available for men to imagine for any particular decision. It was not simply language that was being endangered in this episode, it was diversity because a strong and safe city with a dominating tower might deter people from moving away from such a safe environment and actually encourage people to move from other places to this safe environment. This activity will be counter to the activity of living in diverse geographic locations whereby diverse species can be developed. Central location is contrary to diversity. As discussed, diversity is a requirement for the fullest exercise of human imagination. Thus, God would want to deter centralization and encourage diversification, which is exactly what happened in this story. Diversity existed before the story, human effort in the story was directed to undermining diversity, the effort was defeated and diversity was restored at the end of the story.

“And now nothing will be restrained from them which they have imagined to do”

This makes it appear as though God did not want man to fully exercise his imagination. This appears to be in direct contradistinction of the gift of imagination. Something more must be at work here. This comment should be read in context with the other discussion immediately preceding this in which it is noted that the people wanted to build a tower with its top in the heavens and wished to make a name for themselves. It is not the unbounded imagination that God was objecting to, it was the use of this imagination to make themselves into Gods. The gift of imagination was being misused. This misuse included a large degree of cooperation (Men shall share living space and resources with each other; and Men were all co-existing with other men – two of the Ground Rules), which God would want, and thus was not severely punished (because they were trying to follow the ground rules, they just missed), only corrected.

In this interpretation, “language” is a metaphor for diversity or homogeneity of human beings.

People with different languages express the same thought differently which can lead to different thoughts being expressed. This creates diversity. And vice versa, if all have the same language, diversity of opinion and thought is vitiated. People who have the same language are more likely to be alike than people who have a different language. Language may convey the self-interested constructed vision of the world of the speaker. To be “of one language” thus implies homogeneity (see above discussion regarding imagination) of mankind.

Furthermore, if there is a diversity of views, then it is likely that there will be at least one dissenting view to any course of action. As such, taking the case of “making a name for ourselves” as an example, if there is a diversity of views, then it is likely that someone will object to this and offer a reason for their objection. Perhaps, the reason for objecting is better than the reason supporting the objected-to course of action and may eventually prevail thereby preventing people from making a mistake. Objection to actions taken from mob decisions is generally desirable. However, without diversity, objection to a mob-generated course of action may not occur. Thus, it would seem that there is basis for God encouraging diversity over homogeneity of language.

The many interpretations of this story testify to the success of the destruction of the one language symbolized by the Tower.

It would seem that the restoration of diversity for humanity would be the most logical explanation for this story since it fits with what God was seeking to establish prior to the building of the Tower and it is what God re-established after the Tower was destroyed.

Preview of the next post

The next post, Number 12 of 14, discusses the question of why God destroyed the Tower of Babel yet allowed Patriarchs, such as Jacob, to erect towers.

^[1] As stated by Leon Kass in The Beginning of Wisdom:

“The much prized fact of unity, embodied especially in a unique but created ‘truth’ believed by all, precludes the possibility of discovering that one might be in error. The one uncontested way does not even admit of the distinction between truth and error. Self-examination, no less than self-criticism, would be impossible; there could be no Socrates who knew that he did not know. With everyone given over to the one common way, there would be mass identity and mass consciousness but no private identity or true self-consciousness; there would be shoulder-to-shoulder but no real face-to-face….

Awareness of the multiplicity of human ways is also the necessary precondition for the active search for the better or best way. Discovering the partiality of one’s own truths and standards invites the active search for truths and standards beyond one’s making. Opposition is the key to the discovery of the distinction between error and truth, appearance and reality, convention and nature-between that which is appears to be and that which truly is. Contesting a ‘human truth’ invites the quest for a truth beyond human making; the discovery of multiple human ways invites an interest in the best possible way.”