Genesis 8:15–11:9

His faith had faced no small test, but the prospect was comforting even from the first. "The face of the ground" was dry when he looked. Almost two months later "the earth had dried out." This stirred and comforted him, and rightly so. Yet he still waited for God's word before going out, just as he went in at His word. He will not rush ahead with the rashness of nature and its self-confidence. He depends on God and obeys His word. And the word came in due time, as it always does to those who look up to Him.

The ark had a window in it. The door was in the Lord's keeping, but the window was for Noah's use. The One who had shut him in was the only one who could let him out. The times and the seasons were in His hand. No one can shorten the time of his journey as a prisoner of hope. But the hopes of such a prisoner may be richly fed, and his spirit stirred within him.

"Then God said to Noah, 'Go out from the ark.'" The same God who had said, "Make yourself an ark," and "Go into the ark," now says, "Go out from the ark." "So Noah went out … and built an altar to the LORD." ALL is simple obedience. There is the obedience of faith and the worship of faith: both go together… Superstition would have worshipped the ark, since the ark was the means of salvation. The heart always tends to let what God appoints take God's place… But Noah's faith passed beyond the ark to the God of the ark. So when he stepped out, he did not look back at it with longing, and he did not treat it as an object of worship. He built an altar to the LORD and worshipped Him — and the ark is never heard of again.

Not one thing had gone into the ark thirteen months before which did not now come out. The small and the great had been in it, and the small were as safe as the great. The creeping thing from the ditch or the hedge was as free from danger and harm as Noah himself. Precious mystery! We may be little, and we are little, as the heart knows full well. But heaven, or the coming system of glory, has fitted itself, like the ark, to receive the small as well as the great.

Now comes the faithful word of God to His waiting and watching servant: how welcome to the prisoner of hope! It is the type of those kept safe through the great hour of temptation that will come on the whole inhabited world to test those who dwell on the earth… Christ's coming to receive His own to Himself for the Father's house on high follows a different pattern. It is not the pattern of Noah passing through the scene of judgment, but of Enoch taken up to heaven before the time of trouble came, as we may see in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17.

No doubt Noah became impatient to leave the ark once it had done its work. Nothing exposes our impatience or self-will so much as this… God stands vindicated, His truth has its witness, Noah and his house are saved — and now he wants to leave before it is God's will. It is harder to stay in the place of blessing than even to reach it… The freed raven, going back and forth, is a fitting picture of our restless, impatient spirits. The dove teaches Noah a different lesson… The dove tells him first that he must have patience.

His faith had been tried more than a little, but the prospect was comforting even from the first. "The face of the ground" was dry when he looked. Nearly two months later, "the earth was dry." This rightly moved and comforted him. Even so, he still waited on God's word to go out, as he went in at His word. He will not rush ahead with the impulsiveness of nature and its self-confidence. He depends on God and obeys His word. The word came in due time, as it always does to those who look up to Him.

"And God spoke to Noah, saying, go out from the ark." The same God who had said, "make yourself an ark," and "come into the ark," now says, "go out from the ark." "And Noah went out … and built an altar to the Lord." ALL is simple obedience. There is the obedience of faith and the worship of faith: both go together. Superstition would have worshipped the ark, since it was the means of salvation. The heart always tends to let the things God appoints take God's place. But Noah's faith went past the ark to the God of the ark. So when he stepped out, instead of looking back at the ark, he built an altar to the Lord and worshipped Him — and the ark is never heard of again.

He landed on the renewed earth. At that mysterious moment, all was in a great sense according to God's mind again. It was no longer corrupt, as it had been when he last walked on it in its old condition, but clean, refined by the judgment.

Not one thing had gone into the ark thirteen months before that did not now come out. The small and the great had been in it, and the small were as safe as the great. The creeping thing of the ditch or the hedge was as free from all danger or harm as Noah himself. Precious mystery! We may be little, and we are little, as the heart knows full well. But heaven, or the coming system of glory, has fitted itself like the ark, to receive the small as well as the great.

Some will say that Noah was a picture of Christ — the righteous head of a saved family, saved because of their connection with him. I grant all this. But Noah's role as a picture does not in any way interfere with the principle I am drawing from this and similar passages. I will state that principle plainly here at the start: the house of every servant of God is brought into a place of privilege, and of responsibility that follows, because of its connection with him.

Now comes the faithful word of God to His waiting and watching servant. How welcome to the prisoner of hope! It is the picture of those kept safe through the great hour of temptation. That hour will come upon the whole inhabited world to test those who dwell on the earth.

Enoch is a figure of those caught up, Noah of the remnant of the Jews who go through the tribulation. In Noah the world is comforted — the figure of the millennium.

His faith had been tried more than a little, but the prospect was comforting even from the first. "The face of the ground" was dry when he looked. Nearly two months later, "the earth was dry." He was rightly moved and comforted by this. Even so, he still waited on God's word to go out, just as he went in at His word. He will not rush ahead in the impulsiveness of nature and its self-confidence. He depends on God and obeys His word. And God gave the word in due time, as He always does to those who look up to Him.

Meanwhile it never was the mind of God that there should be life only, but liberty. Life out of death ushers into liberty. Christ not only gives life and shelters, but does this as a preparation for the freedom of grace. With freedom He set us free. The law had long tested human nature, and its mind proved hostile to God. But now there is life, after death and judgment have done their worst to Him who is risen out of both. So there is liberty as well for those born again.

Noah went out. He landed on the renewed earth. At that mysterious moment all was, in a great sense, according to God's mind again. It was no longer corrupt, as when he had last walked on it in its old condition, but clean, under the refining of the judgment.

Jehovah deals with the creatures set under the headship of Adam. How blessed to know, on authority beyond doubt, that "the creation waits with eager longing for the revealing of the sons of God"! It will "be set free from its bondage to corruption and obtain the freedom of the glory of the children of God." As man's sin dragged it down with himself into ruin, so shall the Second Man raise it out of its degradation and misery.

In Noah, we have a plain figure of resurrection, the whole world passing away in the judgment of the flood, and a new world emerging from the baptismal waters. The apostle Peter teaches us to see in this a type of salvation (1 Peter 3:20-21). And to the man in Christ, risen with Him, the old has passed away and all things have become new. The figure is very plain here, although many a detail may be hidden from us.

"The face of the ground" was dry when he looked, and after nearly two more months "the earth had dried out." Though this rightly stirred and comforted him, he still waited on God's word to go out, just as he went in at His word. He will not rush ahead in the impulsiveness of nature and its self-confidence. He depends on God and obeys His word. And the word came in due time, as it always does to those who look up to Him.

After years of discipline and toil, Noah is in the ark. Very often the quality we are most known for, and from which we have gained most, deserts us, and we suffer much. Noah, no doubt, became impatient to leave the ark once it had done its work... God had been vindicated, His truth witnessed to, Noah and his house saved; and now he wants to leave before it is God's will. It is harder to stay in the place of blessing than even to reach it.

The flood swept away the ungodly. It brought judgment and death on the world. The ark was carried up above the waters and finally rested on the cleansed earth. It taught the lesson of life for the people of God after judgment and death had been passed through. The new earth emerged from the waters of death. Noah and his family set their feet on the dry land as those saved through those waters, as risen from the dead.

Not one thing had gone into the ark thirteen months before that did not now come out. The small and the great had been in it, and the small were as safe as the great. The creeping thing from the ditch or the hedge was as free from all danger or harm as Noah himself. Precious mystery! We may be little, and we are little, as the heart knows well. But heaven — the coming system of glory — has fitted itself, like the ark, to receive the small as well as the great.

The ground on which the Lord commands Noah to enter the ark with his household is, "for I have seen that you are righteous before me in this generation." Someone might object that probably all the household were righteous before God too, but the later history of one of them — Ham (Genesis 9:22-25) — forbids that thought. The force of the statement cannot be weakened in any way: the family of Noah was delivered from the judgment of the flood because of the faith of its head. True, it was not salvation; but it was so in figure (1 Peter 3:20-21). And it was no small blessing to be carried in the ark through that mighty flood.

The same God who had said, "Make yourself an ark," and "Go into the ark," now says, "Go out from the ark." "So Noah went out... and built an altar to the LORD." It is all simple obedience. There is the obedience of faith and the worship of faith: both go together... Superstition would have worshipped the ark, since it was the means of salvation. The heart always tends to put God's ordinances in God's place... But Noah's faith passed beyond the ark to the God of the ark. So when he stepped out, he did not look back at it or treat it as an object of worship. He built an altar to the LORD and worshipped Him. And the ark is never heard of again.

His faith had been tested more than a little, but the prospect was comforting from the first. "The face of the ground was dry" when he looked. Nearly two months later "the earth had dried out." Yet even though his heart was rightly stirred and comforted, he still waited for God's word before going out, just as he went in at His word. He will not rush ahead in the rashness of human nature and its self-confidence. He depends on God and obeys His word. And the word came at the right time, as it always does to those who look up to Him.

Noah, no doubt, became impatient to leave the ark once it had served its purpose. Nothing exposes our impatience or self-will so much as this. God has been vindicated. His truth has had its witness. Noah and his house are saved. And now he wants to leave before it is God's will. It is harder to stay in the place of blessing than to reach it.

Not one thing had gone into the ark thirteen months before which did not now come out. The small and the great had been in it, and the small were as safe as the great. The creeping thing from the ditch or the hedge was as free from danger or harm as Noah himself. Precious mystery! We may be little, and we are little, as the heart knows full well. But heaven, the coming world of glory, has fitted itself like the ark to receive the small as well as the great.

The ordinary use of this word distinguishes all animals from man, and marks off four-footed animals from birds and creeping things, Gen. 8:19. The word is also used symbolically: for the ignorance of man and his acting as a creature without reason or conscience before God, and for great worldly powers, such as the four great kingdoms in Daniel 7.

Nothing is said about anyone being anxious to leave the ark. Had they become so used to living there that they were hesitant to leave? God gave them orders to go out, however, including all the people and all the animals of every kind. Whether at first they returned there for shelter at night we are not told. The animals, sent back into their natural surroundings, would then breed and multiply.

Man, by his sin, has not only brought ruin on himself but has spoiled his home and dragged down all the creatures that depend on him. Thorns and thistles are marks of man's sin, and much more the groans of the animal creation (Gen. 3:18). Man, unlike angels, was made by God the centre of a system of things. The whole of this lower creation either suffers or rejoices with its head.

Meanwhile it never was the mind of God that there should be life only, but liberty. Life out of death brings us into liberty. Christ not only gives life and shelter; He does it to prepare us for the freedom of grace.

The word "altar" is mentioned here for the first time in the Bible. The altar is for worship. Here then worship is for the first time revealed. We worship, having passed from the old into the new, standing on the ground of resurrection. We know that death and judgment are past, and therefore we worship in spirit and in truth. Christ is our altar, and the sacrifices Noah brought are a picture of Christ too. Only the person who knows Christ and the perfect work He has done is a true worshipper.

Everything is simple obedience. There is the obedience of faith and the worship of faith: both go together. The altar is set up where, just before, all had been a scene of death and judgment... Superstition would have worshipped the ark, as being the means of salvation. The heart always tends to put God's appointed means in God's own place. The ark was a very clear and obvious appointed means. But Noah's faith passed beyond the ark to the God of the ark. So when he stepped out of it, he cast no lingering look back at it, and he did not treat it as an object of worship or reverence. He built an altar to the Lord and worshipped Him. And the ark is never heard of again.

Before the flood Noah had been occupied with building an ark for himself and his household. After the flood we find him intent on building an altar for God... He held back none of the small stock of acceptable animals that came out with him from the ark. They had gone in with him to keep their kinds alive on the earth, yet he felt it was right to offer some of them on the altar to God. So his offering shows the thankfulness of his heart. But in it we see something more: the ground on which all blessing could now rest — a sacrifice accepted by the Lord.

Before the flood Noah already knew this essential part of an acceptable sacrifice (Gen. 7:2), though there is no record of how he learned it. But in the law we read God's definition of clean beasts and clean birds, and we find moral teaching tied to the subject (Lev. 11). So we must conclude that no man could have worked out by his own instinct which creatures God would count clean, and which He would not.

Yet as far as we know, no prayer was spoken on that solemn occasion, and the patriarch raised no hymn of praise... It may have been a silent service. We read of nothing that God had heard, but only of what He smelled. A silent service perhaps, yet how full of meaning to Him, and instruction to us.

"And Noah," it is written in verse 20, "built an altar." To whom? To God? Most fittingly it is to Jehovah now. The two names could not be swapped without loss... It is Noah's relationship that appears here. The sacrifice offered there bore witness to the special place in which he stood.

Noah acted on this after the flood. His first recorded act was to build an altar and offer up whole burnt offerings of every clean beast and of all clean birds. For the earth after the flood was held on the ground of sacrifice.

In this the patriarch acknowledged that atonement was his only possible ground for standing before a holy God. That is a striking lesson for people in every age. As that lone column of smoke rose to heaven, "the LORD smelled the pleasing aroma." His mind ran on from that altar to Calvary. There, in due time, the great sacrifice would be offered, and every other sacrifice pointed to it.

Here we have the sacrifice presenting a "sweet savour," or "a savour of rest," to God. It is what He finds His rest and delight in. And in its excellence the offerer finds the ground of his acceptance. The term burnt offering occurs here for the first time. We discover what it means in particular when we come to the book of Leviticus.

Man had not improved, so there was no reason for God to deal with him differently. The Lord's estimate of man after the flood differed little, if at all, from that before it. Compare Genesis 6:5 with Genesis 8:21. Before the flood God spoke of evil as being constantly in the heart of His creature man. After it He declared it was innate. "The intention of man's heart is evil from his youth."

It is interesting too that in Genesis 6:5 the reason for the flood was that "the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and every intention of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." Yet this same fact becomes a reason that God would not curse the earth again (v. 21). Since man's heart is evil from his youth, God would not again curse the earth or destroy every living thing out of it. The reason is that in the sacrifice of Christ there is a remedy for man's evil nature.

The reason God gave for not cursing is that He looks to Noah's sacrifice, not to the sin. God deals with us on the ground of what the Mediator is, instead of what we are. The sacrifice ought to be always in our hearts, but it is always before God.

There was to be no repetition of the curse. Otherwise the Lord might have been always at it, for every thought of man's heart was only evil, and that continually. But on the ground of sacrifice this was said: "the Lord smelled a sweet savour, and the Lord said in his heart, I will no more again curse." He would not again act as He had done. The effect of this sweet savour is very striking. It does not change God's mind; it reveals what He is — the source of peace.

When the Lord smelled the savour of Noah's sacrifice, He said in His heart that He would not again curse the ground. But that was just His own purpose and grace. For a time it was the secret of His own heart. In due time He made His purpose and grace known to Noah. Then Noah took the blessing in a way of special sweetness. He took it as coming from the deep, well-considered, and fully approved counsels and affections of the heart of the Lord Himself.

For God the sweet savour was in what the offerings meant: a new world brought in on the ground of the sacrifice of Christ, His own Son. God had no more pleasure in the actual death of Noah's animals than in those killed on Jewish altars. Hebrews 10:6 says as much: "In burnt offerings and sin offerings you have taken no pleasure."

We must have a basis of approach to God. And more than this: we must be fully accepted, to be completely at rest there. If God finds a savour of rest in the death of Christ, we find our rest there too.

No one can deny that God in His sovereignty has blessed man unconditionally. On what ground have the millions of our race since Noah's day enjoyed seedtime and harvest, summer and winter, day and night? Have these been conditional blessings?… Genesis 8:20-22 makes it clear. We have these blessings only on the ground of sacrifice — Noah's burnt offering, a type of Christ. If God gave them on the ground of men's conduct, men would have forfeited them long ago.

The cleansing of the waters of judgment had made no change in the imaginations of the thoughts of man's heart. They were still evil, and only evil. The heart was uncured, for "that which is born of the flesh is flesh," though there be water to cleanse or fire to refine. It was no change there which gave the Lord thoughts of peace and not of evil towards men.

With the new method of dealing with men, God would bring in a stability unknown before… To man in innocence God made no such announcement. Whether the blessing of paradise lasted depended on his obedience. The flood broke the natural order of the seasons: seedtime and harvest stopped for a year. Because of the sacrifice, nothing will break that order again as long as the earth remains. Man can count on this; and man has proved it. God has often held back the earth's full crop, but the seasons have kept running their round.

When God created the lights in the sky He said, "Let them be for signs and for seasons." It is well known that the different seasons on the earth come largely from the days being longer or shorter, so the earth gets more or less of the sun's heat. After the flood, God declared that while the earth remained the seasons should continue, Genesis 8:22. They fall roughly like this: seedtime, cold and winter run from October to March; harvest, heat and summer run from April to September.

Then after the flood God secures seedtime and harvest. Farming is blessed in a way. The curse is not gone, but man is comforted. So I should think it takes less work to get things out of the earth now than it did before the flood.

The sign or token of this covenant with creation is the rainbow in the cloud. Under it the earth has continued until the present time, and it will continue throughout the millennial period. Then Christ will deliver up the kingdom to the Father. The heaven and the earth will pass away and give place to the new heaven and the new earth — the everlasting state, in which God shall be all in all.

Few things show the divine perfection stamped on the Bible more than its unfailing accuracy about what has already been fulfilled. More than four thousand years ago, Jehovah said, "While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest … shall not cease" (Gen. 8:22); and do they not continue to this day?

The reaping does not come as soon as the seed is sown. So we need patience. But reap we shall — in due season, and God, not we, is Judge as to when the fitting season arrives. Still, arrive it certainly shall. Genesis 8:22 stands true even in this connection.

Water has washed the earth clean. That gives a whole new set of conditions for people and animals. God now sets man in a new order of things. He blesses Noah and his sons, promising that they will be fruitful and will multiply to fill the earth, which had lost so many of its people.

The new world, like the old, began its course with blessing from its Creator. "God blessed Noah." But first God gave a solemn witness. Before He spoke the blessing and the commands that came with it, He showed that the survivors of the flood were unchanged. They had the same nature as those whose sin had ruined them (Gen. 8:21). God had declared man completely corrupt before He judged the world by the flood. He says it again as the second father of the human family starts out. But now it was for mercy, not for judgment, that God spoke these words.

Notice God's command to man as he entered the restored earth. It was to refill that earth — not parts of the earth, but the earth. He wanted men spread out across the world. He did not want them clustered together, relying on their own gathered strength. We will see in Gen. 11 how man ignored all this.

After the flood, His word to Noah and his sons was still, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth." But mankind, though awed by that judgment, had no desire to do His will. They wanted to stay together... their aim was to set themselves up as a universal republic without God.

"Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth," God had said to Adam. "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth," He also said to Noah and his sons. But to Adam He added what He did not add to Noah — "and subdue it." Was this omission accidental? To subdue the earth was God's original design for man on earth. By the fall he lost that place, and can never regain it. Another Man will do it — the Head of the new creation.

He is "blessed," as Adam was in his day, and told to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth." (Gen. 1:28; Gen. 9:1) ... God put the earth under Adam, and the creatures of the forest, the field, the sea and the air recognized him as their master... Now the creatures of the earth only stand in dread and fear of Noah... Yet Noah's table was better spread than Adam's had been at first... For Adam's was the food fitting an innocent one, Noah's is the food of a ransomed one.

God commands him to fill the earth, as He had commanded Adam at the beginning. He is to order and govern it. He is to carry on his religious service and keep up his testimony to God in it. Government is his, and in company with priesthood too.

The first thing Noah does after God had blessed him is to get drunk.

Here we see Christ, the true Noah, Heir of the new earth. Of that earth we read, "no longer will there be anything accursed." All things in it are handed over to Him.

What a different dominion from Adam's! God there, as Creator, puts all living animals under Adam's power; he names them. Here, God is a preserver, a saviour. But He only places the animals in Noah's power, and fear marks the relationship. Noah is their destroyer, and they fear him… This clearly sets the whole thing on a new system and footing.

Now it was a fallen world. God blessed these men and charged them to fill the earth, and the fear and the dread of them were to be upon every beast and bird, with reptile and fish. God delivered the creatures into men's hand. Sin was everywhere, and God took it into account as a fact that could not be ignored.

This is a great mercy. Beasts are stronger than man, and if they had no fear of him, they could all but wipe out the human race. So God has planted that fear in them. They no longer have a nature that submits to man of its own accord, as they did in the garden of Eden.

God created Adam alone, and in "His own image," and made him the responsible head over an unfallen creation. But "Noah found favor in the eyes of the Lord." God led him into the ark, through it, and out of it on the other side of death and judgment, as a redeemed man. He was to begin a new history in another world, under God's promises and covenanted blessings… It is on this new ground that God gave the world out afresh to him.

Then their authority over the lower creatures is restored. The fear and dread of man is to be upon every beast of the earth, and upon all that moves, and God delivers them into his hand. All things are his, and even death itself is now to furnish him with food. This fact carries the deepest meaning. It is death serving life, and God would keep us always mindful of that principle.

If Adam is a picture of Christ as the Head over all things, and as the Head of the Church, then Noah, stepping onto a renewed earth, is a picture of the Lord Jesus as the Governor of the world to come… This is very similar to what God says of man in Psalm 8. It shows that Noah, as well as Adam, pointed forward to the coming Son of Man, with all things put under Him.

All this was very significant, telling us of the character of that kingdom which is to arise in the last days, when the true Noah takes the dominion. Then the earth and its creatures will be established in the covenant of lasting rest and certainty… And then the Lord God will rest in His full delight in it all. It will all stand in the sweet savour of the sacrifice which the Son of His love has offered.

Besides this, mankind was no longer limited to a vegetarian diet (v.2). God allowed him animals, birds and fish as food, just as fully as herbs and fruits. There were no restrictions like the ones God later gave Israel under law (Lev. 11), and then set aside after the death of the Lord Jesus (Acts 10:11-16; 1 Tim. 4:4-5). Of course, if someone finds that a food gives him physical trouble, it is only wise to avoid it. But God does not forbid the use of any.

All things are his, and now even death itself supplies him with food. This fact carries the deepest significance. It is death serving life, and God would keep that principle constantly before us. Almost every meal testifies to us of the very basis of all real gospel, which the Lord's supper declares in full and formal terms.

God now gave every moving thing that lives to be food for man (Gen. 9:3), as freely as He had first given green plants to beast and bird and reptile (Gen. 1:30). But He placed a clear restriction on the blood. Man was not to eat it (Gen. 9:4). The blood was the life, and God reserved it for Himself. Giving man the freedom to eat animals made God's claim stand out all the more. Life belonged to God, and it will go badly for those who despise or defy His rights... This is no longer the dominion given by the Creator. Now He gives permission, and He forbids.

Only after we know deliverance, and in the new place with God, can this be rightly understood. We now go farther than the type and past the restriction imposed here: we drink the blood also. What is God's alone as atonement is ours to sustain and cheer us, as atonement now made.

After the flood, God gave man a grant of every moving living creature for food (Gen. 9:3). Here, under the law, He brings in restrictions... But why these restrictions? Because the law puts man at a distance from God and makes him feel it. It is also meant to teach him the great difference between standing on the ground of keeping the law and standing on the ground of grace... How free was the grant to Noah and his sons! How strict the restrictions placed on Israel!

Demons play on man's sense of defilement. As the cure they suggest staying away from certain foods and from marriage — the very things God has provided for His creature's good. So they make God out to be the author of man's lack of piety... Nothing that God has provided for His creature defiles. Every creature of God is good, and nothing is to be refused if it is received with thanksgiving, because the word of God and prayer sanctify it — that is, God's grant to Noah (Gen. 9:3-4) and the thanksgiving of the one who receives it.

In Genesis 9:3, we find how the word of God put an ample supply of food at man's disposal. It is sad if Christian households do not complete this sanctification by prayer as they use the food He has so mercifully provided.

God now gave man every moving thing that lives for food (Gen. 9:3), as freely as He had first given green plants to beast and bird and reptile (Gen. 1:30). But He put a clear limit on the blood. Man was not to eat it (Gen. 9:4). The blood was the life, and God kept it for Himself. Letting man use animals for food made God's claim stand out all the more. Life belonged to God, and woe to those who despise or defy His rights.

From Genesis 9:4 it is clear, I think, that the expression means flesh in its living state; that is what must not be eaten. And that state — of ruined flesh — lies in its blood… The verse comes in to show that the term means flesh with the life in it — flesh in its living state — which is the blood.

To eat blood denied the rights of God the Creator. Even though man forfeited his own right by sin, the LORD kept His title over life untouched. God set up human government in the first place to deal with death by deliberate violence. Shed blood is the sign of that death, and it belongs to God alone. Man has no right to take it for himself.

To eat the blood would have been a bold taking back of what he had lost through sin — an attempt to win life again by forcing the way that the cherubim's sword guarded. This rule told the sinner that he had lost his right to the tree of life and can never return to it in his own strength. The life has gone back to God. The blood is His. And the gospel comes to tell us how He has used it, even providing with it and through it new, eternal life that cannot fail for the sinner who is dead.

Life belongs to God, so no one of the human race was to eat blood. The sinner has also forfeited his life. He can only live before God on the basis of the death of a sacrifice in his place… So the ban on eating blood reminds us of three important truths. We are creatures, and must remember it. We were sinners by nature, and are to acknowledge it. We owe atonement by blood entirely to God, and are always to own it. The One to whom life belongs has given it to be poured out for our everlasting blessing.

This law pressed on Israel what God had already laid down for Noah after the flood, in Genesis 9:4. So when the apostles and elders gave the same command to Gentile believers in Acts 15:20 and 29, they were not loading them with a mere item of the law of Moses. They were repeating a ban that applies to everyone. We do well to keep it, though we need not copy the extreme carefulness of the Jews, as the instruction of 1 Corinthians 10:25 shows.

Man was not to eat the blood. It was the life, and God kept it for Himself. Letting man use animals for food made God's claim stand out all the more. Life belonged to God, and it will go badly for those who despise or defy His rights. This is the state of a fallen world. God is a Preserver, or a Saviour, of all people, as the apostle says — especially of those who believe.

The life of a man killed by a beast — "from every beast I will require it." So we see that God keeps His right over life, even a beast's life. They must come and offer the blood to God. Man had no meat to eat until God gave it to him. Many are seeking to do away with capital punishment; but what do they care about God? The whole order of God is broken up now. Even a beast that kills should die.

Above all, man's life is sacred. What Cain did is to go unpunished no longer. Man is plainly declared to be his "brother's keeper": he is to require blood for blood, and to do it as the instrument and deputy of God on earth.

No government had yet been set up on the earth, so God would allow no one to punish Cain. Once government began in its simplest form, men were to act, as we see in verses 5 and 6 of Genesis 9.

Man would soon misuse and twist the very governing authority God placed in his hand, following his own will without the fear of God. Rivers of blood would flow — not only through lawless corruption and violence, as before the flood, but through ambitious kings and rulers after it. So God, in His foreseeing wisdom and thoughtful goodness, declares at the very start of the new order, "And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it."

The words of Genesis 9:5-6 — "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in His own image" — first laid the primary basis of human government as it is. Life belonged to God, and He passed that principle on to Noah. From then on man was responsible as God's servant to carry out wrath, even to the shedding of blood if blood had been shed; for he must not carry the sword for nothing.

Life is what lets a created being enjoy the place the Creator has set it in. Sin has come in, so that life is forfeited, and God claims it in the words of Genesis 9:5. That established capital punishment for murder, and the law has never been cancelled or changed.

Notice that nothing like civil government was set up at the beginning. Man did not invent it in all the centuries before the flood. God established it for the first time after that great event... This is why Cain was not punished by man, as responsibility would have required after the sword was committed to Noah. From then on God solemnly required blood for blood.

God attached a value to man's life that He had never declared before. It counted for more still, because now for the first time it fell to government, responsible to God, to defend that life.

The image of God expresses man's place and responsibility of representing God... It is not His likeness, for man lost this by sin and fathered children in his own likeness. But man keeps His image, even fallen as he is here. So the man who kills another (except by proper authority) is guilty of denying God's right in this respect... The murderer does not just interfere with a man and harm him as badly as possible. He also defaces God's image by killing a man, and God sentences the murderer to die.

What is insisted on here is the image, not the likeness. So Genesis 9:6. But in James 3:9 it is "likeness," not "image."... An image "represents"; a likeness is "conformed to."

Clearly it is God's committal of the sword, the power of life and death, into the hands of man... Such is the true source and basis of civil government. It did not spring from a social contract. It did not grow by degrees out of family relationships. It did not begin in the usurpation of man or of a class. As God's command gave it being, so it can never cease to be clothed with His authority, whether men listen or refuse... It is a right of God, which He has been pleased ever since the flood to entrust to human keeping.

The law separated murder from manslaughter. If someone killed a person by accident, that killer could run to a City of Refuge and be protected there. God has given man governmental authority to carry out this universal command. It came long before the law of Moses, and no one has ever repealed or relaxed it. In the New Testament the magistrate does not bear the sword in vain, for he is God's servant for the punishment of evildoers. Romans 13.

God had already spoken long before on this case (Genesis 9); no one has revoked it, and no one can... That ground remains, and so does the guilt on a land that does not avenge such blood. Those who today would abolish the death penalty should weigh it: "no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed in it, except by the blood of the one who shed it."

Man fails with government as well as without it — not only the governed, but the governor. Noah — that is, man — proves completely unable to wield the sword in righteousness before God, because whoever governs must first know how to rule himself. But Noah got drunk... Part of God's purpose is to show this, and so to show that the Man of His right hand must come to rule the earth.

Despite all He foresaw of rebellion and bloodshed, God repeats in Genesis 9:7 His word to men: "Be fruitful and multiply, increase greatly on the earth and multiply in it." They have certainly done this.

God repeats the encouragement of verse 1 to multiply on the earth, and verse 7 puts even more emphasis on it. Multiplying would bring more sinners into the world, but that would not defeat God: by His own pure grace He is able to save sinners. People today try every method of keeping the population of the world down, but God has not told them to do this. He knows how to take care of this problem and will do so in His own way.

Notice, God's command to man, as he entered the restored earth, was to refill that earth; not parts of the earth, but the earth. He wanted men spread out across the face of the world, not leaning on their own concentrated strength. We shall see, in Genesis 11, how man neglected all this.

Back then God gave dominion to man made in His image, after His likeness — dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the heavens, the cattle, all the earth, and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth. Now it was a fallen world. God blessed these men and charged them to fill the earth, and the fear and the dread of them were to fall on every beast and bird, with reptile and fish. He delivered the creatures into men's hand. Sin was everywhere, and God took it into account as an existing fact that could not be ignored.

The Lord's instructions to Noah in verses 3-6 show the start of human government on earth. After Adam sinned, God left man to his conscience. Man broke down completely, and the flood came. So man needed more than conscience, and at this point a new order began: human government. It was necessary to restrain evil and keep order. God, however, gives man only a minimum of law for government — just two laws, covering the rights of God and the rights of mankind.

God entrusted government to the hands of men. Sadly, this new trial soon has the same result as before. The government given to Noah loses its honour at once. The earth, relieved by farming care, becomes in its fruit a snare to Noah. He gets drunk, and his own son dishonours him.

They were to fill the earth. But scattered in peaceful quietness they would count for nothing, so they would not. They had to get a name for themselves, to be a centre. And God scatters into nations by judgment what would not fill the earth by families in peace.

"I will establish my covenant with you" had been God's word to Noah, before he built the ark or the waters came (Gen. 6:18). Now that the judgment is past, and the new earth is inherited, God details that covenant in full and pledges it again to His elect (Gen. 9:8-17). Every covenant we read of in Scripture is specific. Each one names its parties and states its objects plainly. There is no mistaking them.

Genesis 9:1-7 set out the blessing of God pronounced on Noah and his sons for the world that now is. From then on God allowed man to eat animal food, yet forbade him to eat blood, which belongs to God. God also put government into man's hand for the first time. Its task was to protect human life, and to vindicate God where life was taken. Now Genesis 9:8-11 give the covenant God established with mankind and every creature set under man. It is the largest covenant God ever made. It still holds under a merciful pledge that cannot fail.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature. It was something new.

The covenants made by God are of a different order. He makes His covenants from Himself, without consulting man. With Noah God made a covenant that He would not again destroy the world by a flood. As a token of that covenant He set the rainbow in the cloud (Gen. 9:8-17). This kind of covenant takes the form of an unconditional promise.

Here we may observe that it is "God" (Elohim) who blessed and who spoke; no other title would be fitting. "The LORD" (Jehovah) would have been entirely out of place. This is not an occasion for expressing a special relationship. The subject before us is of the widest character. It is the Creator who is declaring Himself the Preserver of all here below. He does so despite the imagination of man's heart being evil from his youth, which had so recently ended in the destruction of everyone on earth outside the ark. God could and would and did bless on the ground of sacrifice. That blessing was provisional, until the infinite sacrifice by which the new heavens and new earth will come in. Here God establishes His covenant with Noah and his sons on a footing that leaves aside all question of the soul or of moral considerations.

His first act on the cleansed earth was to build an altar to the LORD. There he offered burnt offerings of all the clean animals and birds. The LORD smelled a pleasing aroma. He said in His heart that He would not again curse the ground because of man. He would not again strike down every living thing as He had done. This teaches us that God carries on His providential government of the world on the ground of the pleasing aroma of Christ's sacrifice.

God covenants not only with Noah and his sons and with his descendants after them, but with every living creature — cattle, bird, and beast. Without such a covenant, what could guilty man expect but repeated strokes of the same judgment which had just taken them all away? Would not old sins renewed and fresh sins added provoke the same punishment? No; God's covenant with man and the earth steps in absolutely. "I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth." He will surely judge and destroy in another way, as He warns elsewhere. But it was no small comfort, when the world that now is began after the flood, that God settled their trembling hearts against a blow they naturally and rightly dreaded.

"With you I will establish my covenant" had been God's word to Noah, before the ark was made, or the waters had come. Genesis 6:18. Now the judgment is past and the new earth is inherited. So God spells that covenant out in full, and pledges it again, to His chosen. Genesis 9:8-17. And it is here that the word "covenant" is first used. Every covenant we read about in Scripture is specific. Its parties and its purposes are clearly defined and plainly stated. There is no mistaking them.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature. It was something new.

God had talked with Noah, because he was righteous before Him. He had often spoken to Noah, but never before to his sons. The Lord could not do this before the flood, or even before Noah and his family left the ark. Once the sacrifices were offered on the altar, He could and did do it... To the righteous one God could speak apart from a sacrifice; to others only on the ground of it. Noah had a place before Him on earth because of what he was; his sons only because of the sacrifice.

Genesis 9:1-7 set out the blessing of God pronounced on Noah and his sons for the world that now is... Now Genesis 9:8-11 give the covenant God established with mankind and with every creature placed under man. It is the largest covenant God ever made, and it still stands under a merciful pledge that cannot fail.

Notice again that it is "Elohim" Who blessed (Genesis 9:1) and spoke (verse 8). No other title would be fitting here. "Jehovah" would have been entirely out of place. This is no occasion for expressing a special relationship. Far from it: what is before us here is as wide as it could be. It is the Creator declaring Himself the Preserver of everything here below. And He does so even though the thoughts of man's heart are evil from his youth — which had so recently ended in the destruction of everyone on earth outside the ark.

The second head in this second world — the world since the flood — was Noah. But his place stood on changed terms: under a covenanted and unconditional blessing, whose full token was the rainbow God set in the cloud. Under the protection of that blessing we take our part as "his seed" and descendants. This unchanging covenant rests on the faithfulness of God. It is what secures all blessing to every living creature.

There are really only two covenants in Scripture — the old covenant and the new. Still, the word covenant is used in several places about the Lord where it only announces certain relationships. These are relationships He was pleased to enter into with man or with the creature (Genesis 9:8-17, and so on), or on which man was to approach Him — but without conditions. The context must decide the sense.

Genesis 9:8-11 give the covenant God established with mankind and with every creature set under man. It is the largest covenant God ever made. It still stands, held up by a merciful pledge that cannot fail.

At this time God also announced a covenant with Noah and his sons. It included all his descendants too, as well as the birds and animals — all who had been in the ark, and therefore not the fish. The covenant was that God would not again send a flood to destroy the earth.

Here again we may notice that it is "Elohim" Who blessed (Gen. 9:1) and spoke (v. 8). No other name would fit. "Jehovah" would have been completely out of place. This is not an occasion for expressing a special relationship. What is before us is as wide as it could be. It is the Creator declaring Himself the Preserver of all here below.

Because of the sacrifice, God established His covenant with Noah, his sons, their descendants after them, and every living thing that was with them — birds, cattle, beasts of the earth, all that came out of the ark. So the earth and everything tied to it shared in the benefits of the sacrifice. As far as the consequences of man's sin had reached on earth, just as far the blessed results of the burnt offering would be felt.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature.

Without such a covenant, what could guilty man expect but repeated blows of the same judgment that had just swept them all away? Would old sins repeated and new sins added not bring the same punishment? No. God's covenant with man and the earth stands in the way, and stands absolutely... He will judge and destroy in other ways, as He warns elsewhere. But it was no small comfort, when the present world began after the flood, that God calmed their trembling hearts about a blow they had every natural and just reason to dread.

We have had many pledges of this final redemption and joy of the creatures. Noah carried them, two of every kind, with himself and his household through the waters into the new world. And the same covenant that settled him and his descendants there provided just as much for them (Gen. 9:10).

God never forgets His rights as Creator and Preserver. Even when our blessed Lord brought out heavenly and eternal things, He never taught us to despise the birds of the sky or the lilies of the field, or God's care in either case... And the New Testament is as clear as the Old in keeping before us the deliverance He will surely bring for the whole creation, which groans and suffers pain together until now.

God establishes His covenant in a way that cuts off the least fear from every heart that trusted in Him. There is no more fear that a flood will destroy all flesh, and no fear that God will ever deal with the earth in that way again. Without such a covenant, what could guilty man expect but repeated strokes of the same judgment which had just taken them all away? Would not old sins renewed and fresh sins added provoke like punishment? Not so. God's covenant with man and the earth steps in and settles the matter.

Noah's was the second recorded sacrifice, Abel's being the first. Abel's sacrifice shows the ground the believing individual stands on with God. Noah's shows the ground the earth stands on with God. Christ's atonement is the reason God can bear with the appalling mass of evil that meets His eye as He looks down from above. Patience would be impossible without the atoning sacrifice, which is always before the mind of God. So the unbeliever owes the very air he breathes to the Saviour whose name he scorns.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature. It was something new.

The sacrifice of Christ (pictured here) becomes a ground for God's dealing with the earth, not only for accepting man, as with Abel. On this a covenant is founded. God binds Himself in grace, so faith has sure ground to stand on, something it can count on.

Genesis 9:1-7 set out the blessing of God pronounced on Noah and his sons for the world that now is. Now Genesis 9:8-11 give the covenant God established with mankind and every creature set under man. It is the largest covenant God ever made, and it still continues under a merciful pledge that cannot fail. We first hear of a covenant with Noah in Genesis 6:18.

The covenant was to the effect that God would not again send a flood to destroy the earth (vv. 10-11). Once a flood like this had happened, people would fear another. But God's word on this is absolute. Sadly, because another has not come, people deny that the first ever happened! Such is the perversity of human sinful nature!

God has told us that just as that world was destroyed by water so this world will be destroyed by fire. The same word of God says this world is kept for the fire at the day of judgment and ruin of bad men. (See 2 Peter 3:7.) He warns men, and tells them how they may escape. (John 3:16.)

In Genesis 9:8-11 God establishes His covenant with mankind and with every creature set under man. It is the largest covenant God ever made, and it still stands on a merciful pledge that cannot fail. Neither of these applied to the world before the flood. In the verses that follow (12-17) God kindly gives a sign or token of His covenant with the earth. Of a covenant with Noah we first hear in Genesis 6:18.

God makes a covenant with Noah and with the creation, and as the witness of it He gives the rainbow… God gave this covenant to the earth right after the sacrifice of Noah, which is a picture of the sacrifice of Christ.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature. It was something new. The wording of God's promise clearly implies that mankind had never seen a rainbow before.

So the goodness of God pledged in the bow He set in the cloud brings immense comfort. As a rule you do not see the bow unless there is rain. You see it only when the sun shines bright at your back from the opposite quarter of the sky. So no sign could be more fitting. The rain might awaken fears; the glorious bow was fitted to calm them. This was God's own way of assuring man of His unfailing covenant.

The Lord God makes a covenant with Noah and with all the creatures around him. He will keep the earth safe from a second flood. As a token of this, He hangs the bow in the cloud, up there under His own eye, that He may look on it, and so remember His promise… The cloud might threaten, and swell itself with water; the bow should control it. The cloud might frown; the bow should smile… And God set the creation on sure conditions, not on conditions that could fail.

Because of the sacrifice, God established His covenant with Noah, his sons, their descendants after them, and every living thing that was with them… The earth and all connected with it shared in the benefits of the sacrifice. As far as the consequences of man's sin had reached on earth, so far the blessed results of the burnt offering would be felt… The earth as well as man had a share in the covenant, and the creature will one day rejoice in the liberty of the glory of the sons of God.

The bow God set in the cloud long ago, with its many colours and varied beauty, is the token of His covenant with the earth (Gen. 9:9-17)… It is God's object lesson for the human race. It is a public sign hung out in the heavens, so that all may see and learn that God is good. The last mention of the rainbow shows it over the head of the Lord as He claims the earth in power (Rev. 10:1).

The bow is given as the token of the covenant; that does not mean it was created then. God could, of course, have put plenty of clouds above the earth without a rainbow. He says, "I do set my bow."

It is a pointless question, because Scripture has not given us enough evidence to settle it. Was the rainbow seen then for the first time, or was it well known in the earliest ages?... The least we can draw from the words is that God was now, after the flood, pleased to attach a new and merciful meaning to it.

So there is immense comfort in the bow God's goodness pledged when He set it in the cloud. As a rule you do not see it unless there is rain, and only when the sun shines behind you from the opposite side of the sky. No sign could fit better. If the rain might stir up fear, the beautiful bow had every right to calm it, because God Himself was pleased to assure man of His unfailing covenant.

"I bring a cloud... I do set My bow." We may not separate these two, nor look at one apart from the other. It is good for us to remember that man — himself and his works — is only fit for judgment. It is just as good to remember what God is, or the soul must sink into despair.

The bow in the cloud is man's assurance; but it is more, it is God's memorial of the new relationship into which He has entered with His creatures. His eye is on the bow, and not man's only. So He gives them fellowship with Himself in a sign that speaks of peace in the middle of trouble, and of light in the place of darkness.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature. It was something new. The words, "I do set My bow in the cloud," clearly imply that no one had ever seen a rainbow before.

Another universal judgment by water will never come again (verse 15). Another judgment is in store for this planet. "The world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly."

This is a lovely picture of God's glory, for "God is light." Each colour stands for some part of God's many attributes — supremacy, power, authority, grace, righteousness, holiness, love... So all the glory of God is bound up in His promise never again to judge the world by a universal flood.

There was a cloud indeed — a dark, thick, heavy cloud of judgment pouring itself out on the sacred head of the Lamb of God... But, thank God, faith sees in that heaviest cloud that ever gathered the most brilliant and beautiful bow that ever appeared.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature. It was something new. The words, "I do set My bow in the cloud," clearly suggest that no one had ever seen a rainbow before.

The rainbow may have appeared to Noah before, but it was not appointed by God as a token until after the flood. The word translated "set" (nathan) is sometimes translated "appoint," as in Joshua 20:2. Others think it more likely that no one saw a rainbow before the flood, since the air was in a different state then from what it became after the flood.

Men had good reason to tremble after that terrible disaster. Dark clouds covered the sky, the rain fell in torrents, and tidal waves rose with overwhelming force. An accusing conscience would speak even louder of the disaster they had just lived through. Man naturally expects that what happened once will happen again. He expects it all the more if old sins still ruled and new evils sprang up.

As a rule you do not see it unless there is rain. And you see it only when the sun shines brightly at your back, from the opposite side of the sky. So no sign could be more fitting. If the rain might stir up fears, the glorious bow had every right to calm them. God Himself gladly chose this way to assure man of His unfailing covenant. The accuracy is even more striking. The words run, "When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds." Rain does not seem strictly necessary, but cloud is.

We look at the cloud; God looks at the bow. What grace is here! He says, "And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it." The bow tells of God's unchangeable faithfulness and mercy when all is over with man. This is the ground we are on with God.

The mighty angel, the angel of judgment, comes down. He is clothed with a cloud, the frightening vessel of wrath and sign of judgment. This is what God said at the beginning: "When I bring clouds over the earth." But even then the rainbow is with Him... It is not simply with a cloud He comes down, but with the cloud and the bow accompanying it. See Gen. 9:14; Rev. 10:1. This tells us that at the very end He remembers His word, and will hold judgment in check. He will say to it, "You may come this far, and no farther." ... The cloud carries out its commission and pours out its waters, or its judgments, again. But it must stop in obedience to the bow that measures and controls it.

My fellow-believer, in all the trials of the way God would have us see the bow in the cloud. Think of this in your present trial, which He has allowed. Think of the thing that distresses you most of all, which perhaps no other Christian knows anything about. These words are written for you... The cloud may be dark and gloomy, but there is a beauty in it painted by His own hand, and it tells you, despite everything, what He is to you. And remember, whether you see it or not, IT IS THERE.

God sets up His covenant to cut off the least fear from every heart that trusted Him. No flood will destroy all flesh again, and God will not deal with the earth in any such way. Without such a covenant, what could guilty man expect but repeated strokes of the same judgment that had just swept them all away? Would not old sins renewed and fresh sins added provoke the same punishment? Not so; God's covenant with man and the earth steps in absolutely.

This is the immense comfort God's goodness pledged in the bow He set in the cloud. As a rule you do not see it unless there is rain. And you only see it when the sun shines at your back from the opposite quarter of the sky. No sign could be more fitting. If the rain might wake fears, the glorious bow was there to calm them; for God Himself in this way assured man of His unfailing covenant. The accuracy is all the more striking. The terms run, "When I bring clouds over the earth and the bow is seen in the clouds, I will remember my covenant." So "rain" does not seem strictly necessary, but "cloud" is.

The Lord God makes a covenant with Noah, and with all the creatures around him, that He will keep the earth safe from a second flood. As a sign of this, He hangs the bow in the cloud, up there under His own eye, so that He may look on it and so remember His promise. The cloud might threaten and swell with water; the bow would control it. The cloud might frown; the bow would smile.

Because of the sacrifice, God established His covenant with Noah, his sons, and their seed after them. He included every living thing that was with them — birds, cattle, beasts of the earth, everything that came out of the ark. The earth and all connected with it shared in the benefits of the sacrifice. As far as the consequences of man's sin had reached on earth, there the blessed results of the burnt offering would be felt... The covenant took in the earth as well as man, as the creation will one day rejoice in the liberty of the glory of the sons of God.

The rainbow speaks of a judgment now past, of His salvation and His remembrance. Another universal judgment by water will never come again (verse 15). But another judgment is in store for this planet. "The world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly" (2 Pet. 3:6-7).

The rainbow was the seal of God's covenant with the earth, an agreement in which He pledged Himself never again to visit the earth with a flood. So the rainbow appears as a complete circle around the throne, alongside all the judgments about to come from that throne upon the earth. It is as if to remind us that God would act according to the terms of that covenant. He will never forget the pledge He has given, and all the judgments of the great tribulation will not wipe it out.

The whole creation rests, as to its exemption from a second deluge, on the eternal stability of God's covenant, of which the bow is the token; and it is happy to bear in mind that when the bow appears, the eye of God rests upon it; and man is cast not upon his own imperfect and most uncertain memory, but upon God's. "I," says God, "will remember." How sweet to think of what God will, and what He will not remember! He will remember His own covenant, but He will not remember His people's sins.

If God has swept man away once in the judgment of the flood, then whatever the cloud may be, it declares again what He thinks of the first man. If mercy has shown itself and we are spared, we must still never forget that His estimate of what we are is on record, and that the same cloud bears witness to it again. And the bow in the cloud declares His faithfulness to His promise... We look at the cloud; God looks at the bow. What grace is here! He says, "When the bow is in the clouds, I will see it."

So God's goodness pledged immense comfort in the bow He set in the cloud. As a rule the bow only shows when there is rain, and only when the sun shines behind you from the opposite side of the sky. No sign could fit better. If the rain might stir up fear, the glorious bow had every right to calm it; for God Himself stooped to assure man of His unfailing covenant.

Genesis 9:8-11 give the covenant God established with mankind and every creature set under man: the largest covenant God ever made, and still subsisting under a merciful pledge that cannot fail.

Because of the sacrifice God established His covenant with Noah, his sons, their descendants after them, and with every living thing that was with them... So the earth and all connected with it shared in the benefits of the sacrifice. As far as the consequences of man's sin had reached on earth, so far the blessed results of the burnt offering would reach... The earth as well as man had a share in the covenant, and one day creation will rejoice in the liberty of the glory of the sons of God.

The bow in the cloud is the sign, or token, of this covenant with creation. Under it the earth has continued to the present time, and it will continue all through the millennial (thousand-year) period. Then Christ will hand the kingdom over to the Father, and the heaven and the earth will pass away. They will give place to the new heaven and the new earth — the everlasting state — in which God will be all in all.

Here the rainbow is God's remembrance of His covenant with the earth... God is about to pour out judgments on the earth, and on those who had the responsibility of being His people. But He takes pains to show that, before a single judgment falls, there is mercy in store. Before He touches creation, there is the sign of His covenant with the earth... The rainbow was the witness that God had not let go of His ancient word: He could not forget it.

Genesis 9:8-11 give the covenant God established with mankind and with every creature set under man. It is the largest covenant God ever made, and it still holds good under a merciful pledge that cannot fail. Neither the one nor the other applied to the earth before the flood. In the verses that follow (12-17) God chooses to give a sign or token of His covenant with the earth.

This covenant made with Noah and all creation was unconditional. It was a covenant of promise, not depending on any faithfulness of the creature. It was something new. God's words about setting His bow in the cloud clearly imply that mankind had never seen a rainbow before.

At the very least, the words mean that God was now, since the flood, pleased to attach a new and merciful meaning to it. For men might well tremble after that terrible disaster. Dark clouds had covered the skies, the rain had fallen in torrents, and tidal waves had risen over everything.

So God's goodness pledged immense comfort in the bow He set in the cloud. As a rule you do not see it unless there is rain, of course. And you only see it when the sun shines brightly behind you, from the opposite side of the sky. No sign could be more appropriate. If the rain might awaken fears, the glorious bow was fit to calm them. In this way God Himself chose to assure man of His unfailing covenant.

Last of all, God ratifies the covenant and gives a token to confirm it. The bow in the cloud is man's assurance. But it is more. It is God's own memorial of the new relationship He has entered into with His creatures. His eye, and not man's only, is upon the bow. So He gives them fellowship with Himself in a sign that speaks of peace in the middle of trouble, and of light in the place of darkness.

Pure white light divides into seven distinct visible colours. They always appear in the same order, and each colour of the spectrum has a beauty of its own. This is a lovely picture of God's glory, for "God is light." Each colour stands for some particular aspect of God's many attributes: supremacy, power, authority, grace, righteousness, holiness, love, and others. So all the glory of God is involved in His promise that He will not again judge the world by means of a universal flood.

The Lord is now gathering a people for heaven. He is not filling the earth with glory yet, but gathering out a chosen family to have communion with Himself in heaven. Still He is mindful of His promise. He looks on the bow and preserves the earth. He keeps seed-time and harvest, cold and heat, day and night, summer and winter, in their fixed rounds and seasons.

The bow set in the cloud long ago, with its many colours and varied beauty, is the token of God's covenant with the earth. It is God's object lesson for the human race, a public sign hung out in the heavens so that all may see and learn that God is good. The last mention of the rainbow shows it over the head of the Lord, when in power He asserts His claim to the earth.

Genesis 9:18 — 11:9. The story of the deliverance closes here. Now we come to something very different, in many ways the opposite — the history of the delivered people. That history begins with failure. It ends with confusion — and that confusion comes from the same gracious hand that had just delivered them. It is the humbling lesson of what we are, and we now have to read it in the light of what He is.

Ham, we know, is declared to be "the little" one (Gen. 9:24) — usually translated "youngest." Chronology shows that Japheth, not Shem, was the eldest. Shem is put first in the usual formula of "Shem, Ham, and Japheth." That is not due to the order of birth, but to the spiritual purpose which gave Shem that position (Gen. 5:32; 6:10; 7:13; 9:18; 10:1). When the detailed "generations" come, though, Japheth's sons are listed first... Japheth had the honour of being firstborn. Ham is marked by his early rise to political place and natural power. But the honour Godward was kept for Shem, though he is named last.

Verse 18 gives us the names of Noah's sons — Shem, Ham and Japheth — and then the positive statement that "from these the whole earth was populated."... However obscure some races have been, they have become obscure since Noah's time. We have no clear knowledge of how they were scattered through the world — even into North and South America — but all are the descendants of Noah.

The covenant with man and the creation under him, sealed with its sign of mercy, was settled first. Then attention is drawn again to the three heads of Noah's race, "Shem and Ham, and Japheth," in the same order as before (Gen. 5:32; 6:10; 7:13). Now there is an ominous addition: "and Ham is the father of Canaan." The sad incident that follows comments on it at once, and the solemn prophecy at the end of the chapter says more still. It echoes through the whole Old Testament, and it will only be completed in that kingdom which awaits the Anointed of Jehovah, when all the earth shall be filled with His glory.

In verse 21 a notable mark is set on Eber: his forefather Shem is called, in unusual terms, "father of all the sons of Eber," though Eber came several generations later. The opposite happens with Ham, though perhaps not so strikingly. He had to bear the shame of being called "father of Canaan" (Gen. 9:18). So God calls us to notice two things. One is the man who inherited the curse and became the instrument of the enemy, trying to stop Israel from taking possession of the promised land at the right time. The other is the interest He took in making us look ahead to those who stood in the first line of the heirs of Shem's blessing.

One of Noah's three sons: he was father of Cush, Mizraim, Phut, and Canaan... We know nothing about Ham himself except his disrespectful behaviour when his father was drunk. That behaviour brought down the curse of Noah on Canaan.

"Ham" means "black," the unenlightened — or perhaps more exactly the "sun-burnt," scorched and darkened by the very light itself. Light that is not received as light becomes a source of darkness to the soul. And Ham is the father of Canaan — the "trader," as his name means.

It is not only that mankind sprang from a single pair created innocent as Adam and Eve were. A fresh start for the race began after the flood which judged the guilty mass. God preserved Noah and his three sons from destruction. From them began the conditions that continue today, and will continue for their descendants until the Son of man comes with the clouds of heaven... This time the race did not start from a single line. We have three heads with their wives — three great families to renew the history of man on earth, with the experience drawn from the world before the flood.

The last word points to what has been going on ever since... What strikes one more is how slowly it happened after the flood. Whatever moved men to hinder the plan of God, it soon became plain that mankind had settled on one united community. They would not only gather together. They would build a city and a tower with its top reaching to the heavens, and make a name for themselves, so that they would not be scattered over the face of the whole earth. This, we are assured, only brought out God's power and wisdom. He frustrated their empty purpose, and He carried out His will that they should spread over the earth. He judged their self-exalting folly by breaking the bond that held them together.

In the Bible there is no more important chapter than Genesis 10 about the way God arranged tongues, families, and nations. Here alone we find the rise of the different races, with their sources. Who else could have told us how and when this division of the earth happened?... Everyone who has studied it agrees, as far as I know, that there are three, and only three, divisions into which the nations branch... Men worth listening to are all convinced that these three grand lines are just as surely from one origin as they are distinct. That there was only one such root is the statement of the Scriptures.

In Noah's sons we have the heads of the three great divisions of the human race. Their characteristics have developed so differently today that unbelievers dare to deny their common blood (Acts 17:26).

The result of this history is that the world is set out by families. The fashion of this world has blotted out the memory and the sense of this, but not the power. It is rooted in the judgment of God. When the acquired strength of this world grows weak, it will show more and more, as it is at work even now. The fountain heads were three, first named in this order: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Shem's was the family in which God would establish His covenant on earth, and with which He would be in relationship. Ham was hostile to God's family. Last came the Gentile Japheth, though he was the eldest and proudest.

Now there is an ominous addition: "and Ham is the father of Canaan." The sad incident that follows comments on it quickly, and the solemn prophecy that closes the chapter says still more. That word echoes through the whole Old Testament. It will be finished only in that kingdom which awaits the Anointed of Jehovah, when all the earth shall be filled with His glory.

Noah failed to govern himself by his misuse of God's creature, and gave occasion for such sin in his family that a special curse came in there... It is the sad and familiar story of the first man; as soon as he is put to the test, he breaks down. Nor does the evil stop with himself... But God is not mocked. His moral government fails no more than His grace does. And His grace answers every failure of man with something better out of His goodness and wisdom.

Noah sits in the new world — gifted and blessed, enriched and honoured, taught too, and appointed as "the power" under God. With all this he is at ease, and knows he is safe, with no evil or enemy present. A new trial of man was going on, under new circumstances. As with Adam in Eden, God leaves nothing undone on His part... And Noah, like the rest, fails. The very first foot that trod the fresh soil of the new world quickly stained it.

We may note, in passing, that Noah failed in this covenant, as man always has. Instead of drawing blessings out of the earth by working the soil, he starts to grow the vine, and gets drunk. Through this forgetfulness and fault of his, the true principle of government also lost its force at the very start. Noah held the reins of that government, and one of his sons mocked him.

Noah followed in the way of Cain and turned his attention to the ground, and serious failure followed. And so it is in Christian experience. As soon as we follow Cain's way and become occupied with the earth, Satan traps us in one of his snares.

Noah's work as a farmer was of course commendable, but people can misuse anything and bring trouble. This man had received the dignity of authority in government. Yet he allowed himself too much wine, became drunk, and lay uncovered in his tent. This illustrates the weakness of human government from its very beginning. Why is human government doomed to fail? Because those in authority fail to exercise self-government. If a man does not rule himself well, how can anyone trust him to rule others?

God entrusted government over life and death to his keeping. And the man who first received that trust was by far the best fitted for it, in godliness and in experience. Yet look at the very next thing recorded of him. No doubt through self-indulgence and a lack of watchfulness, he not only sinned himself, but brought God's ordinance of government into open dishonour.

This, truly, was a high position — a place of immense power, privilege, and responsibility. How does Noah carry himself in it? He gets drunk, and degrades himself in front of his sons! Such is the plain, obvious fact. Men may reason as they will. They try to smooth it, soften it, and pare it down. They always do that when a great truth bears down on human pride and self-congratulation. But they cannot set aside the humbling fact that the head of the restored earth got drunk.

Although Noah lived 350 years after he began to be a farmer, his name is never mentioned again... Men did not take notice of him that he had been with the Lord. Satan had won the victory over "the preacher of righteousness." This episode comes home with living power to every Christian, the oldest as well as the youngest. We do well to be watchful. "Let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall." (1 Cor. 10:12).

Human government is now set up. It shows its weakness, not in the authority given to it, but in the feeble hands that received it. Noah fails to govern himself. So he becomes a picture of the failure of all government. Yet he is also a hint that One is coming who will reign in righteousness and bring blessing through His reign.

Several Hebrew words are translated wine. Scripture attaches various words to it — "sweet," "new," "strong," "good," "mixed," "spiced," "on the lees" — yet all are wine. And the wine was intoxicating, as we already see in the days of Noah. Drinking to excess is the abuse of it, and Scripture is full of protests and warnings against such abuse.

Man fails with government as well as without it — not the governed only, but the governor. Noah, that is, man, proves completely unable to wield the sword in righteousness before God. Whoever governs must first know how to rule himself. But Noah got drunk. And so another point comes out: man must have a ruler, and he clearly cannot be his own master. Part of God's purpose is to show this — to show the absolute need for the Man of His right hand to come and rule the earth.

This new trial had barely begun when man broke down. He failed at the very point he was responsible to keep intact before God and his fellow men. God had entrusted government over life and death to his keeping. The man who first received that trust was by far the best suited to it, in piety and in experience. Yet the next fact recorded of him is that, no doubt through self-indulgence and lack of watchfulness, he not only sinned himself, but brought God's ordinance of government into open dishonour. And the sin and the dishonour produced no godly sorrow in his own household, but contempt.

Noah sits in the new world, endowed and blessed, enriched and honoured. He is instructed too, and appointed as "the power" under God. With all this he is at ease and knows he is safe, with no evil or enemy in sight. A new trial of man was going forward, under new circumstances. As with Adam in Eden, God leaves nothing undone on His part... In Christ, and in Him only, are unfailing faithfulness and strength. And Noah, like the rest, fails. The very first foot that trod the fresh soil of the new world stained it.

What a condition to find Noah in — the only righteous man, the preacher of righteousness! What is man? Look at him where you will, and you see only failure. In Eden he fails. On the restored earth he fails. In Canaan he fails. In the Church he fails. In the presence of millennial blessing and glory he fails.

We must look at Noah in two ways: as a picture, and as a man. The picture is full of beauty and meaning, but the man is full of sin and folly... Divine grace had covered all his sins, and clothed him with a spotless robe of righteousness. Though Noah exposed his nakedness, God did not see it. He looked at Noah not in the weakness of his own condition, but in the full power of divine and everlasting righteousness.

Noah had all this high favour and special experience. Yet as soon as he was left to his own will, he became a slave to lust under Satan's influence. Noah followed in the way of Cain and turned his attention to the ground, and grievous failure followed. So it is in Christian experience. As soon as we become occupied with the earth, Satan traps us in one of his snares. Although Noah lived 350 years after he became a farmer, his name is never mentioned again. He was alive through the whole godless period that ended with the building of the Tower of Babel. Yet his presence did not restrain his descendants... "Let anyone who thinks that he stands take heed lest he fall."

The last part of this chapter shows a humiliating scene. The lord of creation fails to govern himself... What a condition for Noah, the only righteous man, the preacher of righteousness, to be found in. What is man? Look at him wherever you like, and you see only failure. In Eden, he fails; in the restored earth, he fails; in Canaan, he fails; in the Church, he fails.

Noah's sin brought God's ordinance of government into open dishonour. In his own household it produced no godly sorrow, but contempt. His younger son Ham had no feeling for God's glory, and none for what he owed his father, even in such a disastrous moment. All he showed was the wickedness of his own heart: he mocked Noah without pity, and he was eager to spread his father's shame and to trap his two brothers. Their reverence was as plain as Ham's lack of it. He forgot to whom he owed his life, and his rescue from the flood.

Noah is put to shame; but Ham, his son, glories in the shame. That was a terrible advance in the progress of evil... This was not simply being "caught in any transgression," but "rejoicing at wrongdoing."

Disrespect toward authority is a very grave sin, whether it is a parent's authority or a government's, because God set up both. In the end it leads to setting aside the authority of God, who set it up. Only when we weigh this properly do we see how right Noah's solemn curse was, once he learned what had happened.

This is the evil of despising government, which has become very common in the day in which we live (Jude 8). Though governments often fail badly, this gives us no right to reject or disobey proper authority (Romans 13:1-7).

Divine grace had covered all his sins, and clothed him in a spotless robe of righteousness. Noah exposed his nakedness, but God did not see it. He looked at him not in the weakness of his own condition, but in the full power of divine and everlasting righteousness. So we can see how far astray Ham was in what he did, how totally cut off from God and His thoughts. He knew nothing of the blessedness of the man whose iniquity is forgiven and whose sin is covered. Shem and Japheth, by contrast, show in their conduct a fine example of God's own way of dealing with human nakedness.

Love is far from being indifferent to sin. But love does not have to expose sins, or gloat over the failure of others. If possible, love will deal with sins privately, so that they do not needlessly become public. When they are dealt with and judged, love will no longer speak of them or spread them abroad.

The wicked and scornful son reaped the fruit of his evil in his own son Canaan, just as God remembered the reverent modesty of Shem and Japheth in their descendants. Salvation is by grace, and it cannot fail, because it is the work of God in Christ, where God secures everything for His glory. Even where salvation may not be, God puts honour on obedience and on respect paid where it is due.

His younger son Ham cared nothing for God's glory, and nothing for what he owed his father, even in such terrible circumstances. He only showed the wickedness of his own heart. He made unfeeling fun of Noah, and was eager to spread his father's shame and trap his two brothers. Their reverence was as plain as Ham's contempt for God, and Ham forgot the one to whom he owed his life as well as his rescue from the flood.

Shem and Japheth showed Noah the respect he was due, both as their father and as the ruler in the new conditions. Ham did not. Disrespect toward authority is a very serious sin, whether it is a parent's authority or a government's. God set up both at the start. In the end it leads to setting aside the authority of God, who set it up.

The two brothers did a work of love. The graceless hardness of their own close relative stirred them to it all the more. Yet what sorrow must have filled their hearts. Their godliness forced them to turn their backs on the one they had always looked up to. And they had looked up to him rightly, with steady affection, honour, and gratitude.

Divine grace had covered all his sins, and clothed him with a spotless robe of righteousness. Noah exposed his nakedness, but God did not see it. He did not look at Noah in the weakness of his own condition. He looked at him in the full power of divine and everlasting righteousness. So we can see how far astray Ham was in the course he took, and how completely cut off from God and His thoughts. He knew nothing of the blessedness of the man whose wrongdoing is forgiven and whose sin is covered. Shem and Japheth, by contrast, show in their conduct a fine example of God's way of dealing with human nakedness. So they inherit a blessing, while Ham inherits a curse.

The same principle holds true for a parent's authority and for a government's authority. Proper respect will seek to cover failure, not expose it. But we must stress this: it applies to cases of failure, not to cases of wicked abuse of authority.

Love is far from being indifferent to sin; but love does not necessarily expose sins, or gloat over the failure of others. If possible, love will deal with sins privately, so that they do not needlessly become public. When they are dealt with and judged, love will no longer speak of them or spread them abroad.

The wicked and scornful son reaped the fruit of his evil in his own child Canaan. The reverent modesty of Shem and Japheth was remembered in their descendants. Salvation is by grace, and it cannot fail, because it is the work of God in Christ. Even where salvation may not be in view, God puts honour on obedience and on respect paid where it is due.

God gave this man the dignity of authority in government. Yet he allowed himself too much wine and became drunk, and in that state he lay uncovered in his tent. This shows the weakness of human government from its very beginning. Why is human government doomed to fail? Because those in authority fail to govern themselves. If a man does not rule himself well, how can he be trusted to rule others?

His younger son Ham had no feeling for God's glory, and none for what he owed his father, even in such terrible circumstances. He only showed the wickedness of his own heart. He mocked Noah without pity, and he was eager to spread his father's shame and trap his two brothers. Their reverence was as plain as Ham's contempt for God. He forgot to whom he owed his life and his rescue from the flood.

Ham, we know, is declared to be "the little" one (Gen. 9:24) — usually translated "youngest". And the dates show that not Shem but Japheth was the eldest… Shem is named first in the usual formula of "Shem, Ham, and Japheth." That first place is not due to the order of birth, but to the spiritual purpose which gave Shem that position.

In Genesis, as here, the order is Shem, Ham and Japheth. We cannot assume this to be the order of birth. In Gen. 10:21, where Shem and Japheth are mentioned, Japheth is called the elder. And some ask whether "younger son" in Gen. 9:24 refers to Ham or to his son Canaan.

Disrespect of authority — whether a parent's or a government's — is a very grave sin, because God set up both. In the end it leads to setting aside the authority of God, who established it… When we come, in verses 25-27, to the curse that came from Noah's lips, we find it fell on Canaan with no mention of Ham. We think this shows two things. First, Noah's sad lapse happened some time after the flood. Enough years had passed for Canaan to have been born and become active. Second, Canaan was involved with his father in the matter, and the weight of the curse fell on him rather than on his father.

Either way it was mercy to keep the curse Ham had surely earned within the narrowest limits, instead of spreading it over all his descendants. In judgment as in grace God is always wise.

The wicked and scornful son reaped the fruit of his evil in his own offspring Canaan. In the same way, God remembered the reverent modesty of Shem and Japheth in their descendants… Even where salvation may not be, God puts honour on obedience and on respect paid where it is due.

And the saint himself is soon restored. Noah awakens from his wine. The man who was overtaken recovers himself, through the Spirit. And the grace of God gives him a great triumph. It is a very precious and glorious triumph indeed, for the restored one judges his judge, and condemns his accuser.

The end of this chapter shows that the man who first held human government could not govern himself. It is the old familiar story — man tried and found wanting, as always... The sin began with utter disrespect to a father... A man who despises the one he is bound to honour must come to shame and disgrace. He must be not just a servant but "a servant of servants." The highest pride always has the deepest fall.

When God governs the world, He does not confine Himself to the one person or generation involved in the offence... It was mercy not to punish Ham in all his descendants, but in Canaan. God is sovereign in judgment as in mercy, and altogether righteous. Canaan may well have played a part with Ham in the heartless insult and dishonour done to Noah... It was mercy not to draw everyone into God's avenging of the wrong, but to keep it within the smallest bounds.

It may seem strange that Noah did not curse Ham himself, since it was Ham who failed to respect his father. But no doubt it was God who, in His government, led Noah... to visit Ham's conduct on his son. God had already blessed Ham along with Noah and had made a covenant with him — how then could He lead Noah to curse him?... Besides, we do not find that all Ham's sons became the servants of Shem; the curse fell upon Canaan only. It was Nimrod, Ham's descendant, who founded the great kingdoms of the East, and we never read of those kingdoms paying tribute to Israel as Canaan did.

We must also remember that Noah spoke these words as a prophet. The later history of Canaan and his descendants fully justified his solemn words. The next chapter gives us the sons of Canaan. From them came the nations that lived east of the Mediterranean and just north of Egypt. That is how the region became known as the land of Canaan. Centuries later these nations were so vile in their gross sin that God ordered their destruction.

No doubt an evident curse... fell on Canaan when fire out of heaven destroyed the guilty cities of the Plain for their enormous wickedness... Yet Scripture is plain that neither the curse nor the blessing is complete until Israel returns to the land under Messiah and the new covenant. Israel will be rooted there and blessed as long as the earth endures. "And in that day there shall be no more a Canaanite in the house of the Lord of hosts."

This is no doubt prophecy. Even so, it does not give anyone the right to make slaves of others. God authorises no one to put Canaan's descendants under servitude. But Ham did not submit to authority as he should have. So his descendants would learn by experience what obedience to authority means... Canaan's line is not the only one under a curse. All mankind is under one: failing to keep on obeying everything the law commands (Galatians 3:10). Therefore, let us not think we are better than Ham.

She was not only a Gentile but from a race under a special curse. So she drops a claim of kinship that the most wretched person in Israel could make, but that was worthless for her. She bowed and said, "Lord, help me."... The truth fully burst on her, and she submitted to it. Her faith, already real, threw off its hindrance and became great. She gives up all claim, for she had none. She confesses sovereign grace, and receives the blessing at once.

The moral point at the end of chapter 9 is this: Noah abuses the blessing given to him, and so destroys all his fitness to govern. Noah gets drunk: this is not exercising authority. Then comes the wickedness of Ham; and then "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant."

But Shem was blessed, or rather, the Lord God of Shem was blessed (v. 26). Of course we know that Israel came from Shem.

Then God begins the world again, so to speak (Genesis 9). But the moment relationship is in question (v. 26), we have Jehovah the God of Shem.

The reader may note how fitting it is that Genesis 9:26 says "Jehovah the God of Shem," while Genesis 9:27 says only "God" for Japheth. There the meaning is enlargement in providence, not the promised blessing of a special relationship with Himself.

Shem, meaning "name," becomes the family in which Jehovah, the Name, is to be revealed. Jehovah is the God of Shem. Soon we will see a son of Shem, Abram. His descendants become the keepers of Jehovah's revelation… He does not call Himself "the God of Japheth" but "the God of Shem." This shows Shem's supremacy. It is a far-reaching prophecy.

"Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant." Abraham, Isaac and Jacob came from Shem's line, and God was not ashamed to be called their God. He brought them into covenant relationship with Himself. He will yet fulfil for their children all the promises He made to the fathers.

Noah's prophecy gave the blessing to Shem. More exactly, the word was "Blessed be Jehovah, the God of Shem." So it has been. So faith knows now. And so it will be completely fulfilled, when Christ makes the truth undeniable in glorious results to every eye. This is not God's design either by the gospel or in the church. God keeps it for the age to come.

The wicked and scornful son reaped the fruit of his evil in his own offspring Canaan. God remembered the reverent modesty of Shem and Japheth in their descendants… Even where salvation may not be present, God puts honour on obedience and on respect paid where it is due.

Noah prophesied about him. He is not brought into relationship with God here, as Shem is. The prophecy foretells enlargement on the earth, and this has clearly come true.

All history, even in the past, shows God enlarging Japheth, the great coloniser of the earth. Here he stands in the sharpest contrast with Shem. Japheth was not only to spread as a nation, as Shem never did. He was also to dwell in Shem's tents. Europe and the north-east of the old world were not enough. Neither was the new world of America, Australia, and so on. He must also push into Shem's tents in the east. This earliest oracle said so, and so it has happened to the letter, beyond anything human foresight could have expected.

Notice how fitting it is that Genesis 9:26 says "Jehovah the God of Shem," while Genesis 9:27 says only "God" for Japheth. Japheth's verse means enlargement in providence, not the promised blessing of a special relationship with Him. This gives a reason from the text itself, on top of the grammatical one, against an idea many have taken up: that the verse means God dwelling in Shem's tents rather than Japheth. If the Spirit of God meant that through Noah, would He not have said Jehovah Elohim, rather than simply Elohim?

In verse 27 the "he" is Japheth, who "shall dwell in the tents of Shem," and Canaan shall be Japheth's servant as well as Shem's.

Have they not also dwelt in the tents of Shem? Not as mere conquerors, but perhaps, among other ways, as sharers in the blessing pictured so well by Israel's "own olive tree." In time this is where the adoption would be, and the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service, and the promises. And here were not the fathers only, but the Son, the Messiah, whose personal dignity goes far beyond anything Israel has yet owned — to their own deep loss so far.

All the European nations come from Japheth. They have spread out to the ends of the earth, and they have entered into the favour that belonged to Israel. Israel, for the time being, has been cut out of that favour because of unbelief, as Romans 11 shows.

In their two blessings, Shem and Japheth give us two tendencies that often get split apart and should not be. Shem's is the receptive, contemplative life, and its danger is to drift into the mystical. Japheth's is the energetic, practical life, which, when it stands alone, tends to cut itself off from faith… Japheth's blessing is enlargement and dwelling in the tents of Shem. The practical life finds its true home in faith alone, and true service is only worship flowing out among men.

Japheth would enlarge and dwell in the tents of Shem. Two thousand years passed before the first signs of it appeared. Then Alexander, from Europe (Japheth's home), invaded the countries of Asia… Diplomats may plot and politicians may argue about it. They can no more stop it than they can stop the sunset. Four thousand years ago an old man said it would be, and it must be.

After the flood, God gave mankind a fresh start under Noah. But as under Adam, so again, failure and sin quickly followed. We have plenty of testimony that Noah was a godly man who found grace in the sight of the Lord. He lived for no less than 350 years after the flood, as the end of our chapter tells us. Yet only one thing about him is on record in all those years. He planted a vineyard and made wine. Self-indulgence trapped him, and he drank himself unconscious. The man now most responsible to control others lost control of himself. The age of patriarchal government broke down at the very start, even in the hands of a godly man.

Noah lived on for centuries afterwards, but the history mentions him no more. Adam disappears in the same way after his sin, and Cain's crime led to Seth being given instead of Abel.

Noah — whose name means rest, repose, comfort — lived some 350 years after the judgment of the flood. That was long enough, sadly, for him to see rebellion against God break out everywhere. He also saw idolatry rise and spread over the inhabited earth of that time.

Compared with his father Noah and those before him, Shem's years mark the growing decline of human age after the flood. Yet before he came near the end of his six hundred years, it was given to him to live into the days not only of Abram but of Isaac. Peleg, the fifth in this series, did not reach half the limit of Shem's term; and Nahor, the father of Terah, dwindled to a hundred and forty-five years. So in God's providential arrangements man was coming by rapid steps to the span of years that has been ordinary since the prayer of Moses in Psalm 90.

Noah — like John the Baptist — closed one scene and opened another. He died in that new scene, just as those of the old order before him had died. In man nothing had changed, though his circumstances and even his guilt had changed a great deal. For man had now sinned against blessing and grace.

So it was to be, according to this earliest prophecy. And so it has happened, exactly to the letter. No human foresight could have expected it. This closes the divine account of Noah: "After the flood Noah lived 350 years. All the days of Noah were 950 years, and he died."

The list of Noah's sons comes in the right place, after Noah's fall and its remarkable consequences. It is like Genesis 5, where the genealogy of Adam's sons followed his sin and Cain's sin, which had led to the revealed state of the world before the flood. Noah lived on for centuries afterwards, but the history never mentions him again, just as Adam disappears after his sin.

The human race was completely one at the beginning, and in effect it was one again in Noah after the flood. Mankind's outward progress must have been all the greater because people lived so long. Whatever that progress was, the sons of Noah had all of it for their new start.

After the flood, God gave mankind a fresh start under Noah. But as under Adam, so again, failure and sin soon followed. We have had plenty of testimony that Noah was a godly man who found grace in the sight of the Lord. He lived for no less than 350 years after the flood, as the end of our chapter tells us. Yet in all those years the record holds one thing only about him. He planted a vineyard, made wine, was trapped into self-indulgence, and became unconscious in drunkenness. The man now most responsible to control others lost control of himself. The age of patriarchal government broke down at the very start, even in the hands of a godly man.

Noah's name means rest, repose, comfort. He lived some 350 years after the judgment of the flood. That was long enough, sad to say, to see a general outbreak of rebellion against God, and the rise and spread of idolatry over the whole inhabited earth of that time.

There is no sound reason at all to doubt the long lifespans credited here to people before the flood. God made man to live, not to die; his death came in through sin… The span of years may seem long beside Psalm 90, where the prayer of Moses lays down the ordinary rule of human life. Even so, they were only the "days" of Adam, or of anyone else recorded here. After Adam they were born, and they had children; they lived and they died.

The words "and he died" are repeated so many times in this chapter. They give us a striking contrast to the words "And He shall live," written about David's Son and Lord in Psalm 72:15.

"By faith Enoch was taken up so that he should not see death, and he was not found, because God had taken him" (Hebrews 11:5). "He was not, for God took him" (Genesis 5:24). We cannot help contrasting his outcome with that of Noah, another herald of the coming judgment. God did not remove Noah from the scene. In mercy He kept him safe through the ordeal, and then settled him in the cleansed earth. He took Enoch away before the judgment fell.

Genesis 2:4 — Genesis 4:26, Generations of heavens and earth. Genesis 5:1 — Genesis 6:8, Generations of Adam. Genesis 6:9 — Genesis 9:29, Generations of Noah. Genesis 10:1 — Genesis 11:9, Generations of sons of Noah. Genesis 11:10 — Genesis 11:26, Generations of Shem.

This chapter is full, instructive, and interesting, and Genesis 11:1-9 that follows it has its own special importance. The chapter describes something new among mankind: its many nations spread out in their lands, each with its own language. Before the flood no such distinctions existed. However large the population was, they were not grouped like this, and they were not marked off from one another... God had not yet set up any government, there was no division into nations, and there was no difference of language.

In the Bible there is no more important chapter than Genesis 10 for how God arranged languages, families, and nations. This is the only place that tells us how the different races arose, and where they came from. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was divided this way?... All men who are worth listening to are convinced of this: these three great lines are clearly separate, and just as clearly they came from one common origin. Scripture says there was only one such root.

This is the right place for such a statement. It comes after Noah's fall and its striking results. In the same way, the family line of Adam's sons came in Genesis 5 after his sin, and the line of Cain led on to the picture God gives us of the world before the flood. Noah lived on for centuries, but the history never mentions him again, just as Adam drops out of sight after his sin... It was well ordered that none of Noah's sons had children until they came out of the ark. So too Adam became a father only after the fall, when God sent him out of paradise.

Genesis 6:10 gives the names of Noah's sons: Shem, Ham and Japheth. Genesis 10:1 and 1 Chronicles 1:4 give the same names in the same order. Yet Genesis 9:24 and 10:21 show us that the true order of their birth was Japheth, Shem and Ham. But God in His sovereignty chose Shem, so his name comes first.

Chapters 10 and 11 give us the history of the world after the flood — how it was peopled and set in order... Chapter 10 gives the facts. Chapter 11 shows how they came about, in judgment. The two chapters are not to be read as following one after the other in time. The division into nations and languages came after men tried, in their pride, to hold together at Babel. Then, last of all, we are given the family Jehovah owned, so that we can trace in it the line down to the one who carried the promise.

It looks like nothing more than a list of generations — fathers, sons, and so on. What can be interesting about that? But God does not give history the way men give it... The names of the nations listed here are found all through the Bible, and each keeps its character through its whole history, right to the end. In Ezekiel, and especially in Ezekiel 38 and 39, many of these names come up in connection with the very last days.

Notice that the order of Noah's sons is now changed. Japheth has the first place when we come to the survey of family lines. We learn why when we arrive at the line of Shem (v. 21). For spiritual reasons Shem had always held that place of honour up to now, and Ham was otherwise put before Japheth.

Genesis 10:2, compared with verse 21, plainly shows that Japheth was the eldest, and Ham probably the youngest (Genesis 9:24). Both Shem and Noah owe their place of precedence not to birth, but to the honour God set on them.

No chapter in the Bible matters more than Genesis 10 for the providential arrangement of tongues, families, and nations. This chapter alone gives the rise of the different races, with their sources. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was so divided? This is the divine account of the races. Here man is at sea. But where he does arrive at conclusions, this at least is the common consent, as far as I know, of all who have given their minds to the study: there are three, and only three, divisions into which nations properly diverge… More than that: those worth hearing are just as sure that these three lines had one common origin. Scripture says there was only one such root.

Of Japheth — the Celtic family (Gomer), the tribes to the north of the Caucasus (Magog), Medes, Greeks, Tibareni, Moschi and Thracians — generally the Indo-Europeans.

Magog (compare Ezekiel 38:2) is quite as certainly identified with the land we call Russia. To these we must add Meshech and Tubal, races long known as Moschi and Tibareni: these are the Muskai and the Tuplai of the Assyrian inscriptions, who find their representatives in Moscow and Tobolsk. This is the Slavic branch.

It became evident that Sanskrit, old as it may be, is no more the parent of these tongues than Greek. They were all sisters, derived from a language earlier than any of them. That they had a common source in the east was for the learned a recent discovery. But our verse tells us with full authority that Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech and Tiras were sons of Japheth. So they were all linked together — distinct in dialect, but of common origin.

There remains only Tiras. From the likeness of the name, most have believed it stands for the Thracians… Still the question cannot be said to be settled, like all the others that come before it.

Of the sons of Japheth we get Gomer, Magog, Tubal and Meshech under the same names in Ezekiel 38 as followers of Gog. You will also find Persia there, which was united to Media (Madai)… so only Javan and Tiras remain to be accounted for.

"When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel." Israel was, and shall yet be, God's earthly centre. It is a fact of the deepest interest that from the very outset, as we see in Genesis 10, the Creator and Governor of the world formed the nations and fixed their bounds according to His own sovereign will. He did it with direct reference to Abraham's descendants, and to that narrow strip of land they are to possess.

Only two of Japheth's sons have their descendants listed — Gomer, the head of the Celts, and Javan, from whom came the Greek and Italian peoples.

These were respectively the families which peopled Asia Minor, and Armenia on the east, and the sons of Javan whom we cannot fail to identify with the Greek or Hellenic families, extending to Spain, France, Italy and Sicily, the isles or maritime coasts of the nations.

Jeremiah brings in Ashkenaz as one of three kingdoms called out together with Ararat and Minni against Babylon, when the kings of the Medes also played their decisive part. Ararat and Minni were parts of Armenia, which here as elsewhere comes under Togarmah. So there seems no sound reason to doubt that Ashkenaz and Riphath held the peninsula of Asia Minor at that time. They took their place with Cyrus, the leader of these peoples, during that famous struggle. But this in no way weakens the general fact that Gomer pushed west into Europe, granting that at least Togarmah settled in Armenia.

Scripture says nothing about where Riphath lived. But Jeremiah 51:27 makes it certain that Ashkenaz belongs among the Asiatic kingdoms, and probably in the district between the Caspian Sea and the Black Sea… It is a fair and interesting subject to discuss. Still, it is better to hear and weigh the evidence of Scripture before we come to conclusions.

Jewish teachers say that Ashkenaz later moved into the part of Europe afterwards called Germany… But the evidence is far from clear, though all agree that the Germanic peoples descend from Japheth and from Gomer… There is far less ground for applying Riphath to Great Britain, as some have done… But there is no good reason to doubt that those we call Germans came from Gomer, just as the Celts did.

Ezekiel 38 beyond doubt unveils the judgment of Russia at the end of this age. It lets us see its supporters forced to follow it and to share the general ruin. Among the peoples of the north are Gomer and all his hordes, and the house of Togarmah from the far north with all his. The southern peoples of Persia, Cush, and Phut come under the same influence.

"The house of Togarmah" from the northern parts I suppose to be the Armenian people, as they say of themselves. They will follow Gog, the prince of Rosh, Meshech, and Tubal — that is, the last head of the Russian Empire.

At the time of the scattering at Babel, God caused the various peoples to drop down just where His ways would need them when Israel came into view. So God Himself settled the first map of the world, with the land and people of Israel as His centre.

Verse 2 already showed briefly that Javan represents Greece. Ionia, however, or Ionis, comes closest to the Hebrew name. It was a narrow district in Asia Minor, and Greek colonies are said to have taken it over more than a thousand years before Christ… Ionia was remarkable not only for its success in trade, but for its excellence in art and poetry, in history and philosophy — before the mother country reached any eminence in these pursuits… In fact Greece is so named from Genesis 10 to Zechariah 9.

Eldest son of Javan, the son of Japheth. His descendants seem to have occupied the "isles of Elishah," and supplied the Phoenicians with blue and purple (Ezekiel 27:7). Josephus identifies them with the Aeolians. Others connect Elishah with Elis in the Peloponnese.

Tarshish follows. Here it appears that we need not doubt an original settlement on the south shore of Spain. The Phoenicians later had trading stations there too, and from there their ships brought silver, iron, tin and lead to Tyre, as Ezekiel 27:12 tells us. The ships of Tarshish were the most famous for merchandise in ancient times… There may have been another place of the same name in the south east or the Indian ocean, to which Solomon's ships sailed from Ezion-Geber.

There is no difficulty about Kittim. The term is applied beyond dispute to two of the peninsulas of Europe — first Greece (or Macedon), then Rome or Italy… So in Balaam's prophecy (Numbers 24:24) we learn of a fleet from the west afflicting Asshur, when all man's power comes to destruction. Elsewhere we hear of the "isles" or sea-coasts of Kittim. That can hardly mean Cyprus, as Josephus and many since his day have understood it.

The Old Testament refers to it several times in connection with its "ships." At first it points to Cyprus. But Jeremiah 2:10 and Ezekiel 27:6 speak of the "isles of Chittim," so it is clear that in the Prophets other islands go with Cyprus.

Descendants of Javan, son of Japheth. Genesis 10:4; 1 Chronicles 1:7. In the margin the name is RODANIM, which has some manuscript support.

Javan's firstborn is Elishah, "God has forgotten." That is always the thought in a soul that has forgotten Him. His second son is Tarshish, and… he speaks of one who goes out from the presence of God. He is a seeker on his own account, attracted by everything shining or conspicuous. He is trying to satisfy himself with what has never satisfied anyone. But that helps us understand the energy he puts into it. He is the ideal explorer, and the riches of the earth become his own… Here is the restless spirit of one adrift from God — a prodigal.

"May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant." From Japheth have come all the European nations. They have spread out to the ends of the earth. They have entered into the favour that belonged to Israel — and Israel has been cut out of it for the time being because of their unbelief, as Romans 11 shows.

The word usually translated "isles" also covers coast-lands (such as the Greek, Italian, Spanish and Scandinavian peninsulas), and settlements or homes wider still. Gesenius argues this, and the more learned modern Jews fully agree. Again, four things mark the division: their lands, the tongue spoken, their family descents, and the resulting nation.

There are no islands near to Palestine. Cyprus is the nearest, and that is about seventy miles from the nearest point of Syria, far north. So the term "the isles" may be used at times indefinitely for places or nations far off.

How did all these languages come into existence? They are the result of God's judgment at Babel, when "there the LORD confused the language of all the earth. And from there the LORD dispersed them" (Gen. 11:9). In Genesis 10:5 we read: "From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language …" It is here that the word "tongue" first occurs in the Bible.

It is clear that the order of time is not in question here. The following chapter shows that the difference of tongues was imposed suddenly by a divine act of judgment… The orderly partition followed the confused dispersion.

Yet, contrary to the common purpose of men, each country went to its own race… The memory of the flood would not dispose men to separate. But God meant it to be, and so it was: one race of Adam, yet with all the variety into which the different family lines were to divide and fill the earth.

But the God of creation is the God of providence, and He knows how to give effect to His word. Here we have Europe, though not Europe only, as the destined scene for the line of Japheth. Of all the earth it is the most varied in outline and has the most coastline, since its shores are the most deeply cut. That makes it the easiest to reach through its inland seas, and the most open to contact with other lands. It was exactly suitable for him who was to be enlarged in his activity beyond his brothers.

The principle of government, which God laid on Noah and his sons, was to prove its great practical value. Its control could now reach men far more easily, once nations marked them off from one another… Families of course had existed before, in the middle of an undivided race. From now on, in the new state of things, they take their place in their lands by the lesser relation of their nations. Each nation was welded together by the tongue that set it apart from others of different descent and place.

It is evident from Acts 17:26 that the earth's surface is enough for men to live on, and that God has set the bounds of the nations. If men had respected these God-appointed bounds, and had been content with the "place in the sun" He had given them, there would have been no wars.

The peopling of the earth was in view of the coming of the Heir of all things, He for Whom all things were made.

In the Old Testament prophets we can identify the descendants of the line of Japheth, as well as those to follow of Ham and Shem. In Revelation… we hear of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, out of which the Lamb purchased saints to God by His blood.

The Holy Spirit now brings before us the descendants of Ham. The name of Japheth ("may he spread") seems to carry prophetic meaning, and Genesis 5:29 claims such meaning outright for Noah's own name. So there appears to be meaning in the name of his younger son too. It means "warm" or hot, and so "dark" or black.

The form of the word in Hebrew is the dual, which some would refer to upper and lower Egypt. However that may be, the context decides that both Cush and Mizraim mean men, and sons of Ham. Ephraim, born in Egypt, also has the dual form, but is no less surely the name of a man.

The children of Ham are pointed out in Genesis 10:6. Of these, Canaan has been destroyed, and his country turned over to Israel. Cush (Ethiopia) and Phut are also found under Gog — those of Cush only in part. The reason is this: one part of the family of Cush settled on the Euphrates, the other on the Nile, that is, north and south of Israel.

Phut or Put is an example of the more degraded stock of Ham's descendants in Africa. They lived next to Egypt and Ethiopia, and Scripture names them with one or the other at times… The very obscurity that covers this African branch of Ham's sons serves to show how low they had fallen.

But Canaan, named last, has the most unenviable place of all. He was the early object of curse, and the fiercest enemy of Israel in the land assigned to them by promise. The Canaanites were a highly civilised race, yet steeped in shameless idolatry and every moral corruption. So, according to God's righteousness on earth, they were given up to destruction — both because they deserved it, and as a safeguard, so that Israel would not be drawn into the same sins. And that is what happened: Israel failed to carry out His sentence, and were drawn in, to their own sin, shame, and cost.

It may seem strange that Noah did not curse Ham himself, since it was Ham who had not respected his father. But no doubt it was God who led him. In His government, God moved Noah to give out the prophecy about his three sons in the new world, and so to visit Ham's conduct on his son. God had already blessed Ham along with Noah and had made a covenant with him — how then could He lead Noah to curse him? Besides, we do not find that all Ham's sons became the servants of Shem; the curse fell on Canaan only. It was Nimrod, Ham's descendant, who founded the great kingdoms of the East, and we do not read of them paying tribute to Israel as Canaan did.

The obvious fact that strikes one here is this: after the flood, this branch of mankind stood out for the earliest and strongest civilisation. And not in one isolated case, but in Asia and in Africa alike. Scripture confirms the truth, and even its critics, hostile as ever, cannot dispute it. But alongside material progress another feature stands out just as much: the degradation of the race, their fall into savage ways and habits… However opposite, both are effects of departure from God.

I will not go into details. But I will say this: no chapter in the Bible is more important than Genesis 10 for how God arranged languages, families, and nations. This chapter alone gives the rise of the different races, and where they came from. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was divided like this? The details are of the greatest interest, especially when compared with what is predicted for the last days. There we see the same countries and nations appear again for judgment in the day of the Lord.

So the Jews did not go wrong here. They gave Cush not only Ethiopia and the nearby parts of Africa, but also the opposite coast of Arabia and the southern shore of Asia as far as India. But Arabia also received a large population from Shem, which gave their language its character. That came early from Joktan, Eber's son, and later from Ishmael's twelve sons and from Jokshan, Abraham's son.

Fourth son of Cush, a son of Ham. He was the father of Sheba and Dedan. Their descendants probably settled along the shores of the Persian Gulf. Merchants of Raamah traded with Tyre, and they were no doubt connected with these descendants.

In Ezekiel 27 Sheba occurs twice. First with Raamah in verse 22, which fixes him as the Cushite in the same part of Arabia. Second with Asshur and others in verse 23, which points to the line of Shem. The different merchandise of each confirms it. In the same way, the men of Dedan in Ezekiel 27:15 look like Cushites on the Persian Gulf. The island of Dadan keeps the name alive there, and their imports and exports match. But verse 20 sets apart a different Dedan, who seem to come from Shem through Keturah.

Sabtecha is the last named of Cush's sons. Scripture makes no mention of him beyond the genealogical list here and in 1 Chronicles 1. So we cannot say anything for certain. The most anyone can add is Bochart's guess that his people made their way to Carmania, on the Persian shore of the Gulf.

Sheba and Dedan and the merchants of Tarshish and all its leaders will say to you, "Have you come to seize spoil? Have you assembled your hosts to carry off plunder, to carry away silver and gold, to take away livestock and goods, to seize great spoil?" They may be eager to deal with the plunderer and profit by buying the loot they expect. But they too will soon say: truly there is a reward for the righteous; truly He is a God who judges on the earth.

So Christ as the King wins worldwide dominion by displaying His power in righteous judgment. For "may the kings of Tarshish and of the coastlands render him tribute; may the kings of Sheba and Seba bring gifts! May all kings fall down before him, all nations serve him!" (Psalm 72:10-11)

There is nothing mythical in the little that Scripture says. Nimrod "began to be a mighty one in the earth." It had not been so with Abel or Seth, with Enoch or Noah. What they enjoyed was God's gift. They looked for Him who is coming. Nimrod sought great things for himself, like Cain. Cain was the first builder of a city in the earliest days; Nimrod was the first after the flood, and on a large and repeated scale. Present power was his aim; and God allowed it apparent success.

We are further told that "he was a mighty hunter before the LORD." There seems no good reason to doubt that this is meant literally. It made a great impression on his contemporaries, so that his skill as a hunter became proverbial. "Therefore it is said, 'Like Nimrod a mighty hunter before the LORD.'" Clearly it gave him trained skill and strength. In time that skill passed into another field of far deeper interest and seriousness.

There is more implied in this than merely his being a literal hunter of animals. His name means "we will rebel," not only "I will rebel." He was a leader in hunting the souls of men, to make them rebels.

He was "mighty upon the earth," and "a mighty hunter," using force and craft to bring man as well as beasts under his sway. The words "before the Lord" probably mean imperial energy and authority seized in independence of Jehovah. Nimrod and his descendants founded both Babylon and Nineveh.

He was under the curse, but that meant nothing to him. He did not fear Jehovah at all, and he was willing and able to show he was strong before Him. There is a clear difference between the hunter and people of God like David and Amos, who were shepherds caring for the sheep. The hunter tries to kill the animals he is hunting. This remains Nimrod's character down the ages.

Nimrod was the first to set aside the rule of the fathers over their families. That order had held until then, and it continued elsewhere for ages afterward. His ambition could not stop at hunting animals, and it led him from wild beasts to mankind. "And the beginning of his kingdom was Babel."

Here, then, we have the character of the founder of Babylon. Babylon's character all through the book of God matches its founder remarkably. It always appears as a mighty influence in the earth, acting in direct opposition to everything that owes its origin to heaven. Only when this Babylon has been completely abolished does the cry go up among the hosts above: "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God the Almighty reigns." Then all Babylon's mighty hunting will be over for ever, whether its hunting of wild beasts, to subdue them, or its hunting of souls, to destroy them.

The aim of the builders of Babel was to make themselves a name. To some extent they succeeded, for Nimrod "began to be a mighty one in the earth." The call of God carried Abraham into a path far removed from the power and fame of these famous men. … How great is the honour that God Himself should speak of him as "Abraham, my friend." Here is true greatness, greatness that lasts, while Nimrod's tower and city are only a heap of shapeless ruins on the plains of Mesopotamia and his rebel name is almost forgotten.

But there is nothing mythical in the little that Scripture says. Nimrod "began to be a mighty one in the earth." It had not been so with Abel or Seth, with Enoch or Noah. What they enjoyed was God's gift. They looked for Him who is coming. Nimrod sought great things for himself, like Cain, who built the first city in the earliest days. Nimrod was the first to do so after the flood, and on a large and repeated scale. Present power was his aim; and God allowed it apparent success.

There seems no good reason to doubt that this is meant literally. It made a great impression on the people of his day, so that his skill as a hunter became proverbial. The hunting gave him trained skill and strength, which he later carried into a field of far deeper interest and seriousness.

There is more implied in this than merely his being a literal hunter of animals. His name means "we will rebel," not only "I will rebel." He was a leader in hunting the souls of men, to make them rebels. The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, where man was exalted in defiance of God.

He was "mighty upon the earth," and "a mighty hunter," using force and craft to bring men as well as beasts under his control. The words "before the LORD" probably signify imperial energy and usurped authority, independent of Jehovah.

"Before the LORD he hunted." In defiance of God he sought conquest and power. He added house to house and field to field, wanting to be lord alone… He had no heart for any portion God could give him. He set out to provide for himself and to make his own fortune, so that his dignity and honour came from himself. And such a man is the man of the world to this day.

There is a clear difference between the hunter and people of God like David and Amos, who were shepherds and took care of the sheep. The hunter tries to kill the animals he is hunting. This remains Nimrod's character down the ages.

How different was Jehovah's way later! Israel wanted a king like the nations, and chose one who served himself… Then God took His servant David from the pasture, from following the sheep, and made him prince over His people, Israel, to feed them.

The first self-exalted man after the flood was Nimrod. Beginning as a hunter of wild beasts, he developed into a tyrant over men. And so the centuries have rolled on in their monotonous course. Nimrods have never been lacking.

Nimrod was forceful, a mighty hunter. He gained the upper hand and founded a "kingdom," and the beginning of it was Babel. This happened, we judge, before Noah's long life ended; and if any kingdom existed, it should have been his. The power that should have been given to Noah was taken by Nimrod, and used to serve himself and his own renown. With this began the founding of cities to serve as centres of human influence. Babel, Erech, Accad and Calneh are among the first we have any record of.

It was among the sons of Ham, then, that a kingdom was first set up among men. God was not in any of Nimrod's thoughts; He was not sought, nor did He give the least direction in the matter. His own ambition gave Nimrod the plan. He carried it out by the force of his will, and by the skill he had gained in his hunting. How different the way of Jehovah at a later day! For, when Israel wanted a king in imitation of the nations and chose one who served himself... He took His servant David from the pasture, from following the sheep. He made him prince over His people, over Israel, to feed them.

What did he care if it had begun in godless self-will? It aimed to gather mankind into one centre, against God's design and command to fill the earth. What did he care if the builders had abandoned it under a divine judgment that forced them to scatter over all the earth? The abandoned city and tower suited his plan exactly: a kingdom for himself, not a universal commonwealth. So "the beginning of his kingdom was Babel." Success encouraged him to go forward, and "Erech, Accad, and Calneh, in the land of Shinar" followed.

The builders may be scattered, but their principles survive. Judgment does not cure... Nimrod, a grandson of Ham, plants his flag on the very spot that had witnessed the judgment of God. ... He had no heart for any portion God could give him. He set out to provide for himself and to be the maker of his own fortune. His dignity and honour would come from himself. And such is the man of the world to this day. He was the earliest example and pattern of the one who, in the closing days, will do as he pleases and fill up the measure of man's sin.

In them we find two great principles. They mark the natural energy of the human heart doing its own will: the spirit of despotism, and the spirit of association. Nimrod, the first example of individual supremacy, begins to be mighty in the earth... On the other hand, man does not like being governed. He joins with others to make himself completely independent of God. Joined with others, he thinks himself capable of anything. "Union," he says, "is strength." And this is true until God steps in... But when God had scattered men, Nimrod took possession of all they had done. The beginning of his kingdom was Babel.

Ancient name of the plain lying in the south between the Euphrates and the Tigris. It was where Nimrod established his kingdom, and where the tower of Babel was built. ... Later it was known as Chaldea, or Babylonia... and some of the captives from Judah were taken there.

That was how Babylon began, and its character all through the book of God matches that beginning. It is always seen as a mighty influence in the earth, acting in direct opposition to everything that comes from heaven. Only after this Babylon is completely abolished does the cry go up among the hosts above: "Hallelujah! For the Lord our God the Almighty reigns."

It seems his ambition was to rule the whole world. The aim in building the tower of Babel was to have a centre of government, control and oversight. The tower was never finished, and no man will ever gain that rule, until He comes to whom the whole creation rightly belongs.

Older English versions make it look as if a son of Ham named Asshur built Nineveh. Yet Genesis 10:22 and 1 Chronicles 1:17 name Asshur as a son of Shem. But in the margin of verse 11 it reads that "he went out into Assyria," that is, Nimrod went out into Asshur or Assyria (the Hebrew is the same). Micah 5:6 confirms this, for it links Assyria and Nimrod together. Assyria goes back to Asshur or Assur, a son of Shem. Nimrod came afterwards and may have subdued the country, but with what result is not shown.

Nothing here says that Ham's descendants drove Asshur out. The wording suggests instead that the success of Nimrod set the example, and stirred a similar ambition. Everything the record reveals shows how completely all of them forgot Noah's authority, though he was still alive. The authority of the family head gave way to men's own thoughts and will.

Nimrod's name means "we will rebel," not only "I will rebel." He was a leader in hunting the souls of men, to make them rebels. The beginning of his kingdom was Babel, where man was exalted in defiance of God. Other places are also mentioned in the land of Shinar. The move from that land into Assyria came no doubt after the Lord scattered the people from Babel (Gen. 11:8). Nimrod's ambitious course of self-will was not stopped even by God's judgment at the tower of Babel.

When Asshur did his work, we need not imagine anything more than a small beginning of what would in time reach such power and splendour. It held that power long enough to conquer the ten tribes of Israel and to threaten Judah and David's house. Then it received a blow so plainly from God that it never troubled the holy land again. Soon it fell, never to rise again, when God chose to bring Babylon forward from a provincial position... to become ruler of the world.

Nineveh was the capital of the Assyrian empire. Her founder was Nimrod, who lived shortly after the flood (Gen. 10:8-12). There was rivalry between Assyria and Babylon from the very beginning. Babylon is the picture of worldly might in a religious garment. Assyria pictures the proud, cruel and overbearing world, which knows nothing but her own importance.

Asshur founded Nineveh not long after the flood, apparently as a rival to Nimrod's Babylon (Gen. 10:11)... But where is Nineveh today? Opposite the town of Mosul there are miles of ruins from which many objects of interest have been dug up... The Medes captured and destroyed the city in 625 B.C. There has been no effort to rebuild it since that time, and it is not the will of God that it should ever be rebuilt.

The Lord, with His chosen instruments, will carry out His final judgments before He brings peace to this troubled world. He strikes the lands where man's lawlessness among the nations first raised its head, through Nimrod and Assyria (Gen. 10:9–11).

In Genesis 10:11 the Authorised Version seems to say that a son of Ham named Asshur built Nineveh. Yet Genesis 10:22 and 1 Chronicles 1:17 name Asshur as the son of Shem. But the margin of verse 11 reads that "he went out into Assyria." That is, Nimrod went out into Asshur or Assyria. Asshur and Assyria are the same word in Hebrew. Micah 5:6 confirms this: it links Assyria and Nimrod together. The name Assyria goes back to Asshur, or Assur, a son of Shem. Nimrod came later and may have subdued the country, but what came of that is not shown.

"From that land went out Asshur, and built Nineveh … and Resen between Nineveh and Calah: this is the great city." The text does not hint that Ham's descendants drove Asshur out. Rather, its language implies that Nimrod's success set the example and stirred a like ambition. Everything the record shows makes it clear: they all forgot Noah's authority, though he was still living. His place as head of the family gave way to men's own thoughts and will.

In defiance of God he sought conquest and power. He added house to house and field to field, in the desire to be lord alone. Erech, Accad and Calneh are mother-cities. Mighty Nineveh, with Rehoboth and Calah, and that great city Resen, are only colonies in the system of this boastful apostate. He had no heart for any portion God could give him. He undertook to provide for himself. He would be the maker of his own fortune, so that his dignity and honour came from himself. And such a man is the man of the world to this day.

The great city "between Nineveh and Calah," one of the four cities built by Asshur, or by Nimrod in Assyria. Genesis 10:12. Some judge it to be not identified; but others trace it to ruins at 36° 12' N, 43° 10' E.

The capital of Assyria was old Nineveh. Nimrod had already built it, along with Rehoboth, Resen and Calah. (Calah is the only town Scripture calls the great city.) It is possible that the expression "that great city" in Jonah 1:2 is to be understood in the same way. In that case the three days' journey of Jonah 3:3 would present no difficulty.

When Asshur did his work, we need not imagine anything more than a small beginning of what would in time reach such power and splendour. It kept that power. It went on to triumph over the ten tribes of Israel and to threaten Judah and David's house. Then it received a blow so plainly from God that it never troubled the holy land again.

The plant that had sprung up to shade the self-occupied prophet withered when God sent a worm. Jonah fainted in the heat and again wished to die. Then the LORD said, "You had pity on the plant … and should not I pity Nineveh, the great city, in which there are more than 120,000 persons who do not know their right hand from their left, and also much cattle?" Yes, He is the God of all grace. He is the God not of Jews only but of Gentiles also. As the faithful Creator, His mercies are over all His works.

Son of Ham, and the name of his descendants and also of the land they held. The meaning of the name is much disputed. The Hebrew word is really Mitzraim. The Authorised Version leaves it untranslated only in Genesis 10:6, 13 and 1 Chronicles 1:8, 11; everywhere else it says Egypt. The word has a dual form, caused, it has been thought, by the division of that land into Upper and Lower Egypt. Matzor, of which Mitzraim is the dual form, occurs many times, and the Authorised Version translates it in different ways: "besieged places," "defence," and "fortress." But it is a proper name, and it refers to Egypt.

The name for Egypt in Scripture is Mizraim. It means "double straitness," or "double strip," and that describes exactly what Egypt is. Egypt is a little strip of country on each side of the great river that flows through it. It owes its existence to that river alone. The desert on each side hems it in and blows its sand over the land from every direction. Each year the river floods, lays its load of earth on top, and renews the soil. So a constant conflict between life and death goes on here, as it does in the world at large.

Shem also had a son called Lud (verse 22). He was the ancestor of the well-known Lydian race in western Asia Minor. It is important to keep him apart from those descended from Mizraim, who spread out west of the Nile. They were archers, as we learn from Isaiah 66:19 and Jeremiah 46:9, where Scripture appears to list the African peoples and describe them that way.

We next hear of the Anamim, of whom nothing more is said in the Bible than in the two genealogical lists. Comparing the names that follow, we may perhaps gather that they were a race which settled in the Delta of Egypt. But we must admit that no reliable trace of them is known, either in the ancient geographers or in the monuments deciphered so far. Here we have the unfailing record of God. He alone saw the end from the beginning, and He was pleased to tell us truth that would otherwise go unnoticed. A day of judgment for the inhabited earth is approaching, and it will prove that these races are not extinct.

The Lehabim, also called Lubim in 2 Chronicles 12:3 and 16:8, together with the people called Phut, or Put, answer to the ancient Libyans. But the ordinary use of "Libya" in old times is vague. It stretches far and wide over almost all Africa west of the Nile… The Naphtuhim come at once after the Lehabim. They are the same as the Lebu or Rebu of the Egyptian inscriptions, as Mr. R. S. Poole has shown — the Libyans proper.

Genesis 10 is a chapter that few would read with interest. It seems to be just a list of generations, of fathers, sons, and so on. What can be interesting about that? But God does not give us history the way men give it… The names of the nations listed here run all through the Bible. They also carry characters that they keep through the whole of history, right to the end. In Ezekiel, above all in chapters 38 and 39, many of these names appear again in connection with the very last days before the millennium.

Son of Ham, and the name of his descendants and also of the country they held. The Hebrew word is really Mitzraim. Older translations leave it untranslated only in Genesis 10:6, 13; 1 Chronicles 1:8, 11. Everywhere else they translate it Egypt.

From Isaiah 11:11, Pathros, as distinguished from Egypt, would seem to be the upper part of the land. Ezekiel 29:14 and 30:13-18 are thought to apply to the Thebaid the ruin that the prophet said would come on the whole land.

There remain the "Casluhim (from whom the Philistines came), and Caphtorim." There is little doubt that these races lived in the Delta before the Philistines moved to the Shephelah, the lowland of Canaan. Some suggest the two names have been swapped here. Deuteronomy 2:23, Jeremiah 47:4 and Amos 9:7 all connect the Philistine settlers with the Caphtorim. Pusey, commenting on the last of these Scriptures, leans to the conclusion that the same tribe moved into Palestine more than once. The Danes and Saxons came into England in the same way, and all merged under one common name. The first migration may have been from the Casluhim. The second came later, but mattered most, and it came from the Caphtorim. A third, of Kerethim (probably from Crete), came in the time of the judges and added only a little to their strength (1 Samuel 30:14-16). From these last, the Cherethites and Pelethites served as bodyguards of King David.

The Philistines were not Canaanites, although sons of Ham. They sprang, according to Genesis 10:14, from Mizraim, to whom the land of Egypt gave its own name. Yet we always find them in the land of Canaan, on the lowland of the south-west coast. Their outlook was toward Egypt, and they had the freest and most open contact with it (see Exodus 13:17).

Genesis 10 shows how the nations were divided. The descendants of Ham were Cush (the Ethiopian) and Mizraim (Egypt, of which this is the Hebrew name). Then in verses 13 and 14, "from Mizraim … came the Philistines." Here is the root, and there the branch, set out for us... they had crossed the desert by what is called "the way of the land of the Philistines." God would not lead Israel this way when they left Egypt (Exodus 13:17), "although that was near." It was in fact a short cut across the desert into the land of Canaan. It was not the true path for the redeemed. That path ran through the Red Sea and the Jordan, through death and resurrection. Only that way could Israel enter the land in a divine way and take it.

They come from the Caphtorim, and that word means as though they were openers; and from the Casluhim, as if forgiven — though not truly forgiven. So you have make-believe teaching, and a make-believe nearness to God, when after all there is nothing of the kind.

We have to admit that no reliable trace of them survives, either in the ancient geographers or in the monuments deciphered so far. Here we have the unfailing record of God, who alone saw the end from the beginning and has chosen to tell us the truth we would otherwise miss. A day of judgment on the whole inhabited earth is coming, and it will prove that these races are not extinct.

The youngest branch of Ham's family now comes before us, already branded with the curse (Gen. 9:25), and the lowest of servants to his brothers. Yet for a long time no doom seemed more unlikely. They were more enterprising than anyone, and as ready to leave home as the sons of Cush. Who spread out as widely as they did? The name Canaan covered the whole group, but it belonged in a special way to the "lowlanders" of the country.

No doubt an evident curse, which none could deny but an unbeliever, fell on Canaan, when because of their enormous wickedness the guilty cities of the Plain were destroyed by fire out of heaven. But even this was far from being an event of Noah's age… Yet Scripture is plain that both the curse and the blessing are not complete till Israel re-enter the land under Messiah and the new covenant, to be rooted there and blessed as long as the earth endures.

Of these races we need dwell on no more than the first two. These two can be separated more easily, because only they are personal names; the rest are names of nations. The name of the first, Sidon, means "fishing," and so does Saida, its modern name. The city stood on the northern slope of a spur that juts into the sea, and its citadel stood behind it on the south… In time Tyre, its daughter city, outshines it, as the later prophets show. In earlier days we hear of "great Zidon" (Joshua 11:8; 19:28)… They were skilled in manufacturing then, and later famous for their ships and their trade. But they corrupted even Solomon's house by their abominations.

The descendants of Heth, a son of Canaan, and so descendants of Ham: a large race who lived in Palestine. In God's covenant with Abraham, his descendants were to take over their land (Gen. 15:20). When Sarah died, Abraham bought the field and cave of Machpelah from the Hittites. His dealings and contract with them show that they were a civilised race, used to commercial transactions (Gen. 23:3-20).

He reminds his sons that the purchase of the cave and the field had been made from the children of Heth, which means "fear." Those who are unsaved are the children of fear, who, through fear of death, are all their lifetime subject to bondage (Heb. 2:15).

Verse 15 speaks of Canaan and his descendants, who took up the land that God had already decided would be Israel's (v. 19)… God's sovereign choice for His people was absolute from the beginning. Whoever held their land in the meantime, this would have no effect on Israel owning it in the end. And God was clearly righteous when He drove out the Canaanites at the proper time, because of their idolatry and demon worship.

Now the races of Canaan occupied that land which Jehovah intended for Israel… They were openly vile, worst of all the cities of the plain, whose wickedness was too shameful to name… Every unnatural evil, and idolatry too, had become their "customs," and Israel had to be kept clear of them. This was no question of cruelty. Israel was at fault for not removing them as fully as Jehovah commanded, so the ones they spared trapped and corrupted the chosen people into the same shame.

She belonged to a city which God had held up as a most guilty city (Matt. 11:21). She was a Syrophoenician — a Canaanite — from a race the Old Testament calls accursed (Gen. 9:25-27), a race no one could expect repentance from. The Lord comes into the region of Tyre and Sidon, peopled by the descendants of Canaan ("Cursed be Canaan"). That is where grace ever comes. And she was one of these outcasts in the fullest sense of the word. She had no privileges, no claims.

The Jebusites held Jerusalem. Joshua defeated them, but they were not driven out until David. The Amorite lived in the hill country of Judah, but pushed east. After their fall and expulsion, the two and a half tribes settled east of the Jordan. The Girgashites disappeared from view.

Scripture carefully points them out as races which took possession of the land destined for Israel. As the song of Moses puts it (Deut. 32:8), "When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel."

We must also remember that Noah spoke as a prophet when he said it. The later history of Canaan and his descendants fully justified his solemn words. Genesis 10 gives us the sons of Canaan. From them came the nations that lived east of the Mediterranean and just north of Egypt. That is how the region became known as the land of Canaan.

The record of the Canaanite families is more detailed, because God had in view His people, whose duty it was to execute judgment and drive them out of the promised land. They might be "spread abroad" or scattered, and seen to flourish for a while. Still the curse was on them. It rested on them from the first on moral grounds. At last their outrages against God and man made it worse — crimes which in His eyes called for extermination.

The races of Canaan were strikingly vile, most of all the cities of the plain, whose wickedness was not to be named... But at last the cup of the Amorites was full. The land became so unclean that the LORD had to visit its iniquity. So He was pleased to make Israel the executioner of His vengeance. It was no question of cruelty. It was Israel's fault not to wipe them out as completely as the LORD commanded, so that those they spared went on to trap and corrupt the chosen people into the same disgrace.

God was going to let the Amorites fill up the cup of their iniquity before He ejected and destroyed them. This is always the way He takes in His holy government. It accounts for the patience He extends to the guilty world we are living in. He knows the full nature of man's evil from the start. But He lets it develop fully, so that when His judgment falls in full severity, all created beings will see that it is just.

The names here, as everywhere, are surely significant. They suggest those powers of evil which occupy the ground and would keep us from enjoying our God-given inheritance in Christ... The Girgashites are "dwellers in clay." Sadly, we are prone to settle down in the dust of earth instead of rising to our heavenly portion. The Amorite is "the talker," not the doer of the Word... while the Jebusite, "the treader down," never rests until all divine things are put under his feet. All these are to be cast out. We must refuse any alliance with them.

As to the literal history, even the doomed Canaanites might have escaped their doom. The way out was such a repentance and turning to God as was found in Rahab. The prophet later announced this principle openly (Jer. 18:7-8). It was a gospel of fact for every nation, before there could be a gospel of words.

Of these races we need dwell on no more than the first two. These can be more easily distinguished, since they alone are personal names, the rest are names of peoples.

A tribe descended from Canaan, son of Ham. It probably lived in Arca, in the north of Phoenicia, about 15 miles north of Tripoli, now called Tell Arka. Gen. 10:17; 1 Chr. 1:15.

A tribe of unknown Canaanites, probably in the far north. Gen. 10:17; 1 Chr. 1:15. The Targums give Orthosia, a town on the coast to the north-east of Tripolis.

One of the races found early in Palestine: they were descendants of Ham through Canaan. Gen. 10:17. Jacob, on his return to Palestine, found Shechem occupied by the Hivites. Gen. 34:2. They also possessed Gibeon, and found means to deceive Joshua into making a league with them. Joshua 9:3, 7... Israel suffered because they did not carry out God's directions to drive out these and the other peoples of the land. These peoples led Israel into idolatry.

The youngest branch of the Hamitic race now comes before us, already branded with curse (Gen. 9:25), and a servant of servants to his brothers. Yet for a long time no doom seemed less likely. They were enterprising beyond any, and no more inclined to stay at home than the sons of Cush. Who spread themselves abroad as they did? ... They are carefully pointed out as races which took possession of the land destined for Israel.

The notices of the Canaanite families are more detailed. God had His people in view, and it was their duty to carry out judgment and drive these families out of the promised land. However much they might be "spread abroad" or scattered, and seem to flourish for a while, the curse was on them. It rested on them from the first on moral grounds. At last it grew worse through outrages against God and man, which in His eyes called for extermination.

It is true that God allowed them to bear a certain mark of degradation as a result. They were enslaved, as the only course left open in righteousness... After the treaty it would have been fresh sin, a crime, to have put them to death. The name of the Lord had been solemnly given, and no one can trifle with that. But on the other hand, the Gibeonites were reduced to the most menial services for the sanctuary of Jehovah. So it was plain that nothing preserved them but His name.

The names here, as everywhere, are surely significant. They suggest powers of evil that occupy the ground first. They would stop us enjoying our God-given inheritance in Christ... the Amorite, "the talker," rather than the doer of the Word. The Canaanite, "the trafficker"... the Hivite, "the villager," suggesting a false humility. The Jebusite, "the treader down," never rests until everything divine is under his feet.

A district and a well-known city in the north of Syria. We read of the HAMATHITE as early as Genesis 10:18. The district lay north of Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon. It perhaps extended southward too, since Scripture speaks of the northern border of Israel as "the entrance of Hamath." Toi, king of Hamath, sent to congratulate David on his victory over Hadadezer. It was more than a hundred miles farther north than Dan, but it became tributary to Solomon and he built store cities there. It afterwards fell into the hands of the Assyrians.

The notices of the Canaanite families are more detailed, because God had His people in view. Their duty was to carry out judgment and dispossess these families of the promised land. However much they might be "spread abroad" or dispersed, and however much they seemed to flourish for a while, the curse was on them. It rested on them from the first on moral grounds. At last their outrages against God and man made it worse, and in His eyes these called for extermination.

The youngest branch of the Hamitic race now comes before us, already branded with curse, and a servant of servants to his brothers. Yet for a long time no doom seemed more unlikely. They were enterprising beyond any other people, and no more inclined to stay at home than the sons of Cush. Who spread themselves abroad as they did? … They are carefully pointed out as the races which took possession of the land destined for Israel. The song of Moses puts it strongly: "When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God."

Acts 17:26 makes it clear that the earth's surface is enough for people to live on. It also shows that God has set the bounds of the nations. Suppose men had respected these God-appointed bounds and been content with the "place in the sun" that He had given them. Then there would have been no wars. But they found no satisfaction in what they had, and they refused to feel after God for it. So they have cast covetous eyes on their neighbours' share and have broken the bounds God appointed — and from that come the bloodshed and the sorrow.

Looking back over the descendants of Ham, we cannot help seeing this. None rose so early into prominence of earthly power and rule. None carried civilisation forward so fast and so widely in earliest times. No other peoples were so marked at first by material grandeur … and they were long the only pioneers of commerce in west and east, north and south. But the true God was absent from their souls. And not only that: they outran all other races in their empty thoughts. They ungratefully abandoned Him when they knew Him, and their foolish heart darkened first.

Every landlord has a perfect right to evict bad tenants. The nations of Canaan had not only failed to pay their rent, as we say. They had damaged and defiled the property so badly that God could no longer endure them. So He was going to drive them out, quite apart from who the incoming tenants were.

Israel was, and will yet be, God's centre on earth. It is a fact of the deepest interest that from the very start, as we see in Genesis 10, the Creator and Governor of the world formed the nations and fixed their borders. He did this by His own sovereign will, and with direct reference to Abraham's seed and to that narrow strip of land they are to hold, under the everlasting covenant made with their fathers.

The Canaanite families are listed in closer detail, because God had His people in view, whose task it was to carry out judgment and take the promised land from them. The Canaanites might spread out and scatter, and seem to flourish for a while. Still the curse was on them. It rested there from the first on moral grounds, and was made worse at the end by outrages against God and man which in His eyes called for their destruction.

The border is traced from Sidon in the north-west, and from Gerar and Gaza in the south-west, and from the four doomed cities of the plain in the south-east to Lasha. Lasha was probably Laish or Leshem in the north-east. Jerome takes it to be Callirrhoe on the east of the Dead Sea, and Bochart a city the Arabs called Lusa in the south of Judah.

Place which marked the limit of the country of the Canaanites. It was probably on the east of the Dead Sea.

Sodom, Gomorrah, Admah, and Zeboim were all caught in the blow. Sodom and the cities around her had enjoyed unusual prosperity, but their prosperity became their ruin. "Pride, excess of food, and prosperous ease" bred sin that a righteous God would not put up with for ever.

The youngest branch of Ham's family now comes before us. He was already marked with a curse, and made a servant of servants to his brothers. Yet no doom ever seemed less likely. They were more enterprising than any, and no more willing to stay at home than the sons of Cush. Who spread out as widely as they did? The name Canaan covered the whole country, but it applied more particularly to the "lowlanders" in it. They are carefully pointed out as the races that took possession of the land meant for Israel.

They were a highly civilised race, but steeped in shameless idolatry and every moral evil. So, according to righteousness on earth, they were given up to destruction. They deserved it, and their removal also guarded Israel from being drawn into the same sins. Israel failed to carry out His sentence, and proved this to their own sin, shame, and cost.

No people rose so early to power and rule on earth. None carried civilisation forward so fast and so far in the earliest times. No others stood out at first with such wealth and splendour, both in the plain of Shinar and in that remarkable country along the Nile — in Asia and in Africa alike. For a long time they were the only pioneers of trade in west and east, north and south. But the true God was absent from their souls.

I will not go into details, but I will say this. In the Bible there is no chapter more important than Genesis 10 for the way God arranged tongues, families, and nations. Here alone is given the rise of different races, with their sources. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was thus divided? This was a new state of things. Nothing like it existed in the world before the flood, and it did not exist for a long while after it. Then came their spread into their lands. This is God's own account of the nations. Here man is lost.

Another word, erets, has wider meanings: sometimes the earth as a sphere — "God created the heavens and the earth," Genesis 1:1; He "hangs the earth on nothing," Job 26:7. But in other places it means only a district: "out of that land went forth Asshur"; "after their tongues in their countries"; "in his days was the earth divided." Genesis 10:11, 20, 25.

This is how mankind spread everywhere after the flood. It happened after some time had passed. People did not go willingly; God's power forced them out… So nationalities began, each with its own tongue, in their lands, but with mercy ruling according to their families. There was no confusion in Jehovah's ordering. Genesis 11:1-9 is the key to the previous chapter 10, the moral account of what was there given as a fact.

Look back over the descendants of Ham and we cannot help seeing this. No line rose so early to earthly power and rule. None carried civilisation forward so fast or so far in the earliest times. No other peoples stood out at first for such material grandeur — both in the plain of Shinar and in that remarkable country along the Nile, that is, in both Asia and Africa. And for a long time they were the only pioneers of trade in west and east, north and south. But the true God was absent from their souls. That was not all. They outran every other race in their empty thoughts. They knew Him, then abandoned Him without thanks, and their foolish heart was the first to grow dark.

The youngest branch of the Hamitic race now comes before us, already branded with a curse (Genesis 9:25), a servant of servants to his brothers. Yet for a long time no doom seemed more unlikely. They were enterprising beyond any… The record points them out with care as the races that took possession of the land destined for Israel. The song of Moses says it with force (Deuteronomy 32:8): "When the Most High gave to the nations their inheritance, when he divided mankind, he fixed the borders of the peoples according to the number of the sons of Israel. For the LORD's portion is his people, Jacob his allotted heritage."

The earth was divided into distinct nations. This division was new, and it was not necessary for the earth under government. The nations were separated by place, by language and — as to the various lower branches — we may add, by more immediate origin. So, whatever changes there may have been since, the earth under government took the form it now bears… And there is more, which is interesting to see. Take the list of nations gathered under the wilful king in the last days, and under Gog in Ezekiel. We find ourselves brought back to the same nations, tongues and families that Genesis sets before us at the outset.

Ham, we know, is called "the little one" (Genesis 9:24) — usually translated "youngest." And the dates show that not Shem but Japheth was the eldest. Shem holds first place in the usual formula "Shem, Ham, and Japheth." That is not due to the order of birth. It is due to the spiritual purpose which gave Shem that position. When the chapter lists "the generations" in detail, however, Japheth's sons come first... Japheth had the honour of the firstborn. Ham wins recognition for rising early to political place and natural power. But the honour toward God was kept for Shem, though he is named last.

Shem comes last, the father of Hebrews, the brother of the one who has long despised him, as holding an elder brother's title. Such is the general result in the peopling of the world under God's ordering.

Verse 21 sets a notable mark on Eber. It introduces his forefather in the unusual terms "father of all the children, or sons, of Eber," though Eber came several generations later. Shem is called not Arphaxad's father, nor Salah's, but Eber's. The opposite happened to Ham, though perhaps not so sharply: he had to bear the shame of the title "father of Canaan" (Genesis 9:18). So God calls us to look two ways. On one side stands the man who inherited the curse. He became the enemy's instrument, trying to stop Israel from taking possession of the promised land in due time. On the other side we see the interest God took in pointing us forward to those who stood in the first line of the heirs of Shem's blessing. For "blessed be Jehovah the God of Shem."

Japheth, the picture of energy and independence, gains little notice for now. He passes away from the centre of view out to the border-lands. In Ham's family we have the earliest development of the world-empires, and the most open opposition to God. Shem means "name," and to him Jehovah reveals Himself. He rightly comes third: the verse marks him as the father of all the children of Eber ("passage") — the pilgrim race.

He is specified, on the one hand as the father of all the sons of Eber, and on the other as the brother of Japheth the elder (or, great one)... we may compare Genesis 14:13, "Abram the Hebrew," to understand better what seems meant. And here the Septuagint, the early Greek translation of the Old Testament, gives "the passer." This at least gives a distinctive stamp, where only tradition gives one to Eber personally.

People usually trace it to his ancestor Eber, or Heber. But Genesis 11:17-26 shows five generations between Eber and Abraham. By that derivation many others could have been called Hebrews. Genesis 10:21 says that Shem was "the father of all the children of Eber." This shows the Hebrews were Shemites. But many other tribes were Shemites too, and they could not be called Hebrews.

Here lies the real and superior dignity of Shem. Messiah is to come of his stock... "Blessed be Jehovah the God of Shem." This was not predicted of the elder, but "God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem." And so it has been. How vast in His providence the spread of that energetic race! And have they not dwelt in the tents of Shem too? Not as mere conquerors, but as sharers in that blessing pictured so well in Israel's "own olive tree."

The list now names the immediate descendants of Shem, it seems in the order of birth. Arpachshad, the ancestor of the chosen line, stands in third place — neither first nor last. Either of those places could have been used for a special reason, as happens elsewhere.

Elam and Asshur were famous among mankind. They are prominent in the Bible too, and bound up with Jewish history. Yet the list only names them, though they come before Arpachshad — as it does with Lud, who comes after him.

Son of Shem. He settled in a highland district east of Babylonia, which became the seat of a powerful monarchy. The district was also called ELAM... In the days of Abraham, Chedorlaomer king of Elam was able to make war as far away as the Dead Sea. In Scripture Elam often stands for Persia... Daniel was at Shushan, which was in the province of Elam.

In Genesis 10:11 the older Authorized Version seems to say that a son of Ham named Asshur built Nineveh. Then Genesis 10:22 and 1 Chronicles 1:17 name Asshur as the son of Shem. But the margin of verse 11 reads that "he went out into Assyria" — that is, Nimrod went out into Asshur or Assyria (the Hebrew is the same). Micah 5:6 confirms this, since it links Assyria and Nimrod together. Assyria goes back to Asshur or Assur, a son of Shem. Nimrod came later and may have subdued the country.

Here again mercy will triumph over judgment. Isaiah 19 says clearly that in the day of Messiah's power and glory Israel will be the third with Egypt and with Assyria, a blessing in the middle of the earth... Both did countless evils to man. Both sinned shamelessly against God. But what will mercy not do on God's part, even for the enemies of His guilty and chastened people?

Lud is the next son of Shem. Here we need extra care, since another race with a similar name lived in Africa. They were the first named of the Mizraim or Egyptian peoples... So there was a Ludim of Ham as well as of Shem. Josephus was right to say that Shem's Lud settled in Asia Minor, as the Lydians.

Aram is the last of the sons of Shem. His name usually stood for the high tableland north-east of Palestine, though it also had a wider use in combination with other terms... At its largest it took in the watershed of the Jordan and the country north, west and east. It also took in the land stretching to the Tigris, with Armenia on the north down to Arabia on the south.

As to the children of Shem (Genesis 10:22), Elam is the same as Persia... Asshur is named in the judgment which will take place in the last times (Micah 5:6; Isaiah 14:25; Isaiah 30:33). He appears also in the conspiracy of Psalm 83, and in other places. Arpachshad is one of the ancestors of the Israelites... Asshur displaced Aram, or Syria, and Aram appears under the title of the king of the North. The same remarks, it seems, may be made of Lud.

Here lies the real and higher dignity of Shem. Messiah is to come from his stock. Canaan was cursed — not all of Ham, but Canaan — and the living word said, "Blessed be Jehovah the God of Shem." The word said nothing like this of the elder brother. Of him it said, "God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem." And so it has been.

Aram is the last of the sons of Shem. People generally gave his name to the high plateau north-east of Palestine, though they also used it more widely, joined with other terms. In the King James Version, following the Greek Septuagint and the Latin Vulgate, "Syria" stands for that general use. In the largest sense the name took in the Jordan basin and the country north, west, and east. It also took in the land stretching to the Tigris, with Armenia on the north down to Arabia on the south. In the south-east part, the land is called Aram-Naharaim, that is, Syria of the two rivers, the Euphrates and the Tigris. Genesis 24:10 translates that name as "Mesopotamia".

The first of them gave his name to the sandy soil south-east of Palestine, in the north of the Arabian desert, and west of the Euphrates. Job 1 tells us who lived there, and about the raids of the Sabeans and the Chaldeans.

We do not know who Job's parents were. But he lived in the land of Uz, so he was one of Shem's descendants (Genesis 10:23). His friends belonged to Shem's branch of the great human family too. Teman, the ancestor of Eliphaz, was a grandson of Esau (Genesis 36:11). Shuah, the ancestor of Bildad, was one of Abraham's children by Keturah (Genesis 25:2). These family details show us roughly where the land of Uz lay, and Lamentations 4:21 confirms that it was not far from Edom.

Hul seems to have gone farther north. We may trace his name in Ard-el-Huleh and Bahr-el-Huleh, south of this district. These are the waters of Merom, which Josephus calls the lake Semechonitis, though he himself connects Hul with Armenia.

Mash, as Bochart supposes, seems to match the place the classical writers called Mons Masius. That is the mountain range north of Mesopotamia, between the two great rivers, the Euphrates and the Hiddekel, or Tigris. In 1 Chronicles 1:17 the name is Meshech, but not the Meshech joined with Kedar, who came from Japheth. In that same family list the writer places these four sons of Aram straight alongside the sons of Shem, Aram included. Such lists often use this short form. The difference is only on the surface.

In the Bible there is no more important chapter than Genesis 10 for the way God arranged languages, families, and nations. This chapter alone gives us the rise of the different races and where they came from. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was divided like this? This is God's own account of the nations. Here man is lost.

Last of all we come to Shem's descendants in verses 21-31. Scripture gives him a striking description: father of all the sons of Eber, brother of Japheth the elder. Eber led the way through Peleg, in due time, to the father of the faithful. Shem did not have the natural rank of the elder brother over Japheth, but the blessing was his above all, as the curse was Canaan's... The Lydians answer to Lud, and the Syrians to Aram.

Of all Shem's descendants, the most important line is the shortest in this genealogy. It matters for its distant results and even for its nearer ones, through its moral and divine connections. We must now look at it.

One of his sons, Asshur, built Nineveh (Gen. 10:11), one of the cities well known as an enemy of Israel, though its founder came from the race of Shem. But the line of blessing did not run through Asshur, but through Arphaxad... When we come to Shem, we are in a higher atmosphere, so to speak. We find that God is the Lord God of Shem. The moral side, the character of things, comes into view — and not just names or history.

Notice that the inspiring Spirit led Moses to change his style at this point. He brings in Arphaxad and his family as a fresh start... In evil, a new departure began with Cush and his descendants. So here, for good, a new departure begins where Arphaxad comes before us. Yet for now we are told little about him, unlike Nimrod, who shot into prominence at once... Good is rare here below, and it grows slowly.

Arphaxad was Shem's eldest son, born two years after the flood.

This region, south of Armenia, was the early home of Shem's descendants, as later Asshur held power there... But Shem's people, unlike the others, were always inclined to stay at home. That made the later crossing all the more remarkable in the forefather of the Hebrews, at the call of God.

We can say little about Salah, or Salach, with any certainty, because the Bible is silent. He was the father of Eber, in the direct line of the chosen patriarch Abram, the man entrusted with the promise. The name means shoot or extension. But to call the name invented for that reason ought to be too absurd even for rationalists to believe.

The root of the word is 'to pass over,' as when someone crosses a river, or moves from one region to another. Abraham was told to leave his country and his relatives and go into the land of Canaan. The word Hebrew is not used until Abraham had left his country and was in the land of Canaan (Gen. 14:13). Once there he was a 'sojourner' — a stranger in a foreign country, living in tents.

They went to the East and got a name. They were the direct descendants of Eber. God did not call them Hebrews; the other nations did. Some take the name from Arba in Hebrew, since the word means to come over, because Abraham came over the river.

Son of Arphaxad and father of Sala (Luke 3:36). He is usually called the 'second' Cainan, because of the earlier one named in Luke 3:37. His name is striking, because it does not appear in the Hebrew, Samaritan Pentateuch, Vulgate, Syriac or Arabic texts of Gen. 10:24; Gen. 11:12; 1 Chr. 1:18. It is in the Septuagint, the old Greek Old Testament, and from there it may have found its way into Luke's Gospel. Or perhaps, as some think, later copies of the Septuagint took it from Luke.

The name of Eber's second son was Joktan, which means "small." Peleg's name, "division," marked an era: the more peaceful dividing of the earth, which came after God's judgment forced the scattering of mankind.

We should keep the "dividing" of the earth in the days of Peleg (chap. 10:25) separate. The scattering came first: Hebrew uses a different word, and the translation ought to use a different word too. Earlier in the chapter the isles are "separated," while here the earth is "divided." The orderly sharing out of the earth followed the confused scattering.

Earlier we had Nimrod's grasp at power and the spread of his rule from Babel, the beginning of his kingdom. Here, in Peleg's days, we have the earth divided. We are not told of human pride and power here, nor of Jehovah scattering men abroad by confusing their language... The division of the earth after that, in the days of Peleg, seems to have happened peacefully. But it is a fact that has lasted ever since, whatever migrations have come through hard circumstances or the desire for a better life.

There is no solid reason to limit the "division" to Eber's own family, with the younger branch moving into southern Arabia and the elder staying in Mesopotamia. If this verse meant only that family split, the younger son would more naturally have carried the name, not the elder who stayed where he was. Besides, how can an event so ordinary match the large words used — "in his days the earth was divided"?

"When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when He separated the sons of Adam, He set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel." Israel was, and shall yet be, God's earthly centre. It is a fact of the deepest interest that, from the very outset, as we see in Genesis 10, the Creator and Governor of the world formed the nations and fixed their bounds according to His own sovereign will. He did it with direct reference to the seed of Abraham, and to that narrow strip of land they are to possess under the everlasting covenant made with their fathers.

The genealogy itself may tell us something, however. In Peleg we see how men were taking possession of the earth more than ever. At the same time, the days of their hold on it were shortening fast — by half, in this very Peleg's time (Gen. 10:25)... God still numbers the fleeting years of those who have forgotten Him.

Joktan, Peleg's brother, has many sons to continue his line. Peleg must wait for another occasion, when his son will appear in the renowned line that leads on to David. The name of Peleg will be a continual reminder, until the new heavens and the new earth, of the judgment upon man through sin. Even the day of grace met the sin and rose above the judgment in God's wise way. It did not do this by cancelling the judgment or wiping out the sin. It did it by giving power to the Apostles at Pentecost to speak to men in the very languages they were born into — using the marks of judgment as channels to proclaim His grace.

The name of Eber's second son was, as we have seen, Joktan, "small." It stands in contrast with Peleg, whose name, "division," marked an era — the more peaceful dividing of the earth, after God's judgment forced mankind to scatter. There is no solid reason to limit this "division" to Eber's own family, with the younger branch moving into southern Arabia and the elder staying in Mesopotamia. If only that family split were meant, the younger son would more naturally have carried the name, not the elder who stayed where he was. Besides, how can so ordinary an event match the large words used — "in his days the earth was divided"?

An old Jewish paraphrase on 1 Chronicles 1:19 suggests that Joktan got his name from the shortening of human life at that time. It is certain that lifespans then sank by half, judging by the recorded years of Peleg (Genesis 11:18-19) and of those who came after him, dropping by stages to their ordinary range.

Joktan matches the Arabic Kachtán, on plenty of evidence of different kinds. Masoudy, in his work called "The Golden Meadows," says of the Beni Sad and of the Kahtan Arabs that they are the only remnants of the original tribes of Arabia… These two tribes, the Beni Sad and Kahtan, are famous in the most distant antiquity, at a time when Arabian history is, for the most part, covered in complete darkness. We shall see that the traces of his thirteen sons are nearly all clear enough too.

Son of Joktan, of the family of Shem. Genesis 10:26; 1 Chronicles 1:20. His descendants have been traced to Southern Arabia, where the tribe of Shelif or Shulaf has been found.

Hazarmaveth clearly matches the district east of modern Yemen, which the Arabs call Hádramäwt (court of death). It too lies in the south of Arabia, on the Indian Sea. It may be unhealthy, but it is no less famous for its rich spices. One of its ports was Zafári, the Sephar we read of later in this chapter.

Jerah, or Yerach, "the moon," is the fourth. Michaelis places him in the "low land of the moon," or in the "mount of the moon," both of which were near Hádramäwt… Indeed, on nothing ancient is Arab tradition more united, as we may see in Golius, than in calling this son of Joktan "Father of Yemen" (Abu Yemen).

Enough still shows up today, even about the least noticeable of these early tribes of Arabia, not only to confirm the account Moses gives, but to show the gracious interest of God in races of mankind that are otherwise obscure and unremarkable.

In the Bible there is no more important chapter than Genesis 10 for the way God's providence arranged languages, families, and nations. Here alone we are told how the different races arose, and where they came from. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was divided in this way?

Plenty of evidence of different kinds shows that Joktan matches the Arabic name Kachtán… We shall see that the traces of his thirteen sons are almost all clear enough too. Some have doubted this, thinking it was a Jewish tradition that Muslim writers took up later. But why doubt that the Katanitai, named by the geographer Claudius Ptolemy, are the Beni Kachtán, or Kahtanys?

The fifth son appears to have settled further east, in the part of the peninsula long called 'Omán. That name is also given to the lower waters of the Persian gulf… The old classical name of the headland is Korodamon akron. Long ago the learned Bochart guessed that the name of the forefather lies hidden in it, that is, Hadoram. Forster is so sure this is sound that he says the fact "is simply this: the headland now bears the name of Hadoram, shortened in the usual Arabic way, in its modern form Ras-el-Had."

Uzal comes sixth. Long ago he gave his name to the capital city of Yemen, later called Sanà, as it still is. E. S. Poole quotes the printed edition of the Marásid. It says the city's name was Oozál. When the Abyssinians arrived and saw it was beautiful, they said Sanà, which means beautiful, and so it was called Sanà. Arabic authors have compared it with Damascus for its waters and its fruits… It seems the Jews have lived there for longer than anyone can remember, and they know it only by the name of Uzal. Older English versions have obscured an important reference in Ezekiel 27:19, where Henderson and Darby read that Vedan and Javan of Uzal traded in Tyre's markets, with wrought iron, cassia and calamus in their barter.

Of Diklah… there is little to say. The name means "palm-trees". For that reason some have looked to the city Phoinikon in the north-west of Arabia Felix. Gesenius, following Bochart, leaned the same way, and looked for his descendants among the widespread people that classical writers called Minaei… Yet Mr. Poole knows of no trace of Diklah in Arabic works, except the mention of a place called Dakalah in El-Yemameh, where many palm-trees grew. Even about the least noticeable of these early tribes of Arabia, enough still appears today. It bears witness to the account Moses gave. It also shows the gracious interest of God in the races of mankind that are otherwise obscure and unknown.

Nothing is better known than the many races and tongues and peoples of mankind, each having its own separate bond of union. Yet not one of these nations can tell how that fact began, so full of meaning for history. Here it is written with simple and calm dignity by the instrument God chose for the purpose. History has utterly failed to show how families first rose into separate nations and tongues, just as science fails in the material world.

Genesis 10 is a chapter that few would read with interest. It seems to be just a list of generations, of fathers, sons, and so on. But the way God gives us history is not at all the way men give it… Not only are the names of the nations given here found throughout the Bible, but they keep their characters right through history to the end. In Ezekiel, especially in chapters 38 and 39, we find many of these names in connection with the very last days before the millennium.

Obal means "bare, or stripped of leaves." It is true that the settlement which recalls the founder was on the African side of the Red Sea, not in Arabia; but it is not a difficulty we cannot get past. We may not be able to trace those who stayed with the great mass in Arabia, while it is of interest to identify those who crossed the strait to Africa. Nothing binds us to confine all the descendants of Joktan, except as a general rule, to Arabia. Those on the western side of the strait were only a few miles from the coast of Yemen, where large numbers of their relatives lived.

Abimael means "father of Mael," and "Mael" is taken to mean "fatness." His people lived on the edge of the great Arabian desert. To this day the district has a high reputation for its balsam, and the sale of it is still an active and highly profitable trade. But in ancient times it was far more so, when Egypt and the West, Rome especially, used spices in large amounts and in luxury.

Sheba needs the greater care, because in the inspired history we hear of no fewer than three heads of tribes who bore the name. First came the Cushite Raamah's son (v. 7). Then came the tenth of Joktan's sons, the one in question here. Later came Jokshan, Abraham's son by Keturah, who fathered another Sheba (Gen. 25:2-3).

Son of Joktan, a descendant of Shem. Gen. 10:28; 1 Chr. 1:22. His descendants have been traced to Southern Arabia, or Arabia Felix. The capital of the district was at or near the modern Mareb.

There is no reasonable doubt about the Queen of Sheba, whose visit to King Solomon holds such an interesting place in Scripture. Our Lord called her the queen "of the South." She ruled the Sabean kingdom we have just spoken of. Indeed "Yemen" means the south generally, and that quarter of Arabia in particular. But Scripture carefully distinguishes the Shemite lines of Sheba, Joktan's and Jokshan's, from Raamah's Sheba in Yemen and the related Seba near the Persian Gulf. Those two Shemite lines are distinct in themselves as well.

As to her country or kingdom, I would just note that we read of several Shebas. .. The Sheba of which this history speaks must have been connected with the great-grandson of Ham, the nephew of Seba (Gen. 10:7). The reason is that the Lord speaks of the queen as being from "the south" and "from the ends of the earth," while Keturah's family was sent east, and Shem's portion was more central.

Genesis 10 is a chapter few would read with interest. It seems to be just a list of generations, of fathers, sons, and so on. What can be interesting about that? But the way God gives us history is not at all the way men give it... Not only are the names of the nations given here found throughout the Bible, but they keep their characters all through history to the end. In Ezekiel, especially in Ezekiel 38 and 39, we find many of these names connected with the very last days before the millennium.

In the Bible no chapter is more important than Genesis 10 for the way God arranged languages, families, and nations. Only here are we told how the different races began, and where they came from. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was divided?

Joktan appears, on plenty of varied evidence, to match the Arabic Kachtán… We shall see that the traces of his thirteen sons are almost all plain enough too. Some had doubted this, supposing it to be a Jewish tradition later taken up by Muslim writers.

The place from which Solomon imported gold, precious stones, and almug trees. Ships brought them to the Gulf of Akaba. Possibly southern Arabia is meant; but India and Africa have also been suggested. 1 Kings 9:28; 1 Kings 10:11; Job 28:16; Isaiah 13:12.

Ever since the maps of Sale and D'Anville, Ofor or Ofir appears as the name of a city and district in the mountains of Oman. It lies on their eastern side, near the source of the Oman river, and within about a degree of the coast. The coast lying due east under Ofir was still famous in the elder Pliny's day for its trade in gold.

The family of "Havilah" have left a clear mark on the country, though the name is, as usual, a little disguised by differences of pronunciation… But we have to take into account that there was a Cushite Havilah. It spread its branches over the peninsula from the north-east to the south-west. We have to tell these apart from the Joktanite tribe, which seems to have settled mainly among their relatives.

Nor is there any serious question about the descendants of "Jobab" in the clan of the Jobaritae… It is remarkable that living representatives can still be traced for every one of Joktan's many sons. This testifies in a simple but striking way to the priceless value of God's word. It was written long before human records existed, and even then those records were few and unreliable until much later.

Genesis 10 is a chapter few would read with interest. It seems to be just a list of generations, of fathers, sons, and so on. What can be interesting about that? But the way God gives us history is not at all the way men give it… The names of the nations given here are found throughout the Bible. They also keep their character all through history to the end. In Ezekiel, and especially in chapters 38 and 39, many of these names appear in connection with the very last days before the millennium.

Nothing is better known than the many races, tongues, and peoples of mankind, each with its own bond of union. Yet not one of these nations can tell how this began. Here in Genesis 10 we survey a fact of immense importance to the government of the earth. History has completely failed to show how families first rose into separate nations and tongues, and science fails in the same way in the material realm.

The verse we now come to needs close study. It matters, and it is difficult too. It is clearly a general description of the limits within which the many sons of Joktan lived. We have already identified their homes in detail throughout Arabia. The only exception is those who crossed to the western shore of the narrow strait that separates their father's land from Africa.

A mountainous district, the boundary of the descendants of Joktan. It is probably Dhafar, pronounced Zafar, or Dhafari, pronounced Zafari, in Hadramaut, part of southern Arabia.

Trace Sephar to the Dhafàr on the border of Yemen and Hadrámaut, in the south-west of Arabia. That goes far to fix Mesha in the north-east of the peninsula. This best suits the short summary of the Joktanite settlements... There is a mountain chain in the Nedjd. It was the boundary of the sons of Joktan in that very region, and their enemies roamed north of it — the sure mark of a distinct race.

But he takes Sephar to be the mountain near Saphar, in the hill-country between Yemen and Hadrámaut. Such limits are little more than 200 miles. They clearly cannot fit the wide spread of the sons of Joktan across the southern half of the peninsula.

Muslim fanaticism has for long centuries shut Arabia and its many races off from free or friendly contact with the rest of mankind. Even so, the Greek and Latin geographers, before and since the Christian era, give striking help in identifying its places and races with those that existed then... And for our purpose here, nowhere in the world do names survive so well, resisting change or outliving it, as among the peoples of the east.

Israel was, and shall yet be, God's centre on earth. It is a fact of the deepest interest that from the very beginning, as we see in Genesis 10, the Creator and Governor of the world formed the nations and fixed their bounds. He did it according to His own sovereign will, and with direct reference to the seed of Abraham and that narrow strip of land which they are to have, by the everlasting covenant made with their fathers.

No chapter in the Bible is more important than Genesis 10 for the way God arranged languages, families, and nations. It alone gives the rise of the different races, and where they came from. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was divided like this?... Here man is out of his depth. Yet where men do reach conclusions, all who have given their minds to the study agree on this much: nations fall into three lines, and only three. So it is here... It is just as certain, in the conviction of men worth hearing, that the three lines had one common origin. Scripture states that there was only one such root.

This genealogy of Genesis 11 continues with Reu the son of Peleg, ignoring Joktan and his sons. The reason is clear. Reu's line leads to Nahor, Terah and Abram. God had purposed Abram to be the father of a chosen race, whom He would separate from the rest of the nations.

In the cases of Japheth and of Ham, the Holy Spirit just records names… nothing but the bare fact, without a word of praise or blame. When we come to Shem, we are in a higher atmosphere. We find that God is the Lord God of Shem, and the moral side, the character of things, comes into view — not just names or history.

In Shem, God's history begins. He is Jehovah, the God of Shem. We have dates and set periods, for God governs after all, and the world must follow. Man belongs to God… But God's people have always been the centre of known history.

Noah's prophecy gave blessing to Shem — or, to be exact, the word was "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem." So it has been. So faith knows now. And so it will be fulfilled in full, when Christ makes the truth undeniable, in glorious results that every eye can see. This is not what God is doing through the gospel or in the church. He keeps it for the age to come.

Shem receives a special blessing: "Blessed be the LORD, the God of Shem; and let Canaan be his servant. May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem" (Genesis 9:26-27). This came true when Jehovah became the God of Shem's descendants through Abraham. The sons of Japheth — the Gentiles — came into the tents for blessing.

So both the judgment and the grace of God meet in Shem, and He is the Lord God of Shem. Before this there was only one language. Now the history of nations begins, and men soon learned to hate and fight. It is a solemn thought, as we look round at the many different nations of the earth, that all these nationalities began in sin and judgment. In the eternal state God will wipe out the last trace of this moral ruin. Then the tabernacle of God will be with men, not with nations. National differences will disappear.

Israel was, and shall yet be, God's earthly centre. From the very start, as we see in Genesis 10, the Creator and Governor of the world formed the nations and fixed their borders. He did it by His own sovereign will, and with direct reference to the seed of Abraham and to that narrow strip of land they are to have under the everlasting covenant made with their fathers.

Ham may lead the way, for the beginning of Nimrod's kingdom was certainly Babel. But Asshur soon followed the same path — not only of ambition, but of idolatry. Even the family of the man chosen to be the father of the faithful was corrupted in this way, at the very time when God's call went out to bless him and to make him a blessing to all the families of the earth (Joshua 24:2). So no one can boast in himself or in his ways.

Genesis 10:21-31 goes as far as Joktan the son of Peleg and stops with his thirteen sons. The genealogy of Genesis 11 continues instead with Reu the son of Peleg, ignoring Joktan and his sons. The reason is clear. Reu's line leads on to Nahor, Terah and Abram, and God had purposed Abram to be the father of a chosen race, whom He would separate from the rest of the nations.

No chapter in the Bible is more important than Genesis 10 for the way God arranged tongues, families, and nations. Only here do we find the rise of the different races, with their sources. Who else could have told us how and when the earth was divided in this way? … This is the divine ethnology. Here man is at sea. But where he does reach conclusions, all who have studied it agree, as far as I know, on one thing at least. The nations branch into three divisions, and only three. So it is here.

Chapter 10 is not history, but a survey of the whole earth. There were no tongues or nations at all until Babel; if you try to put this chapter into time, you will go entirely astray.

It is only in Genesis 11 that we find the cause and occasion that started it. The previous chapter comes in, not following historical time, but as a descriptive parenthesis between Genesis 9 and 11.

So it was that mankind spread everywhere after the flood. It happened after a certain lapse of time, not willingly, but under the constraint of divine power. This confused them thoroughly and at once, so that they might well dread the outcome of any further effort to disobey. So nationalities began, each with its own tongue, in their lands, but with mercy ruling according to their families. There was no confusion in Jehovah's ordering. Genesis 11:1-9 is the key to the previous chapter, the moral account of what was there given as a fact.

So, instead of one vast commonwealth of all mankind, the divine Governor brought about man's dispersion first, and at length, in Peleg's day, the division of the earth. Whatever might come by migration or by decision, the nations, after their families and tongues, occupied their lands down to the apostle's day and to ours. God is not mocked.

This part of the history comes before Abram. It shows the earth under government. Here we have the recorded fact of the division of the earth among its various nations and families. We find this in Genesis 10, where the fact is stated, while its origin is explained only in chapter 11. … Take the list of nations gathered under the wilful king in the last days, and under Gog in Ezekiel. It brings us back to the same nations, tongues, and families set before us at the outset. … The rest of the intervening Scripture is the history of calling and grace.

A fresh start for the race began after the flood, which judged the guilty mass. From Noah and his three sons, whom God preserved from destruction, conditions began which continue today. They will continue for their descendants until the Son of man comes with the clouds of heaven. He will be given dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, so that all peoples and languages should serve Him. … Instead of beginning with a single line, we have three heads with their wives, three great families to renew the history of man on earth.

The King James Version fails to bring out the two thoughts. The speech and the words were both one. "And the whole earth was of one language (lip) and the words one" (or the same) (11:1). The Latin Vulgate reflects the Hebrew text literally. Here Moses is without doubt going back to the state of all mankind for a time after the great disaster of the flood. Until then, and after it, man had only one "lip" and the same words.

Only in Genesis 11 do we find the cause and the occasion. Chapter 10 does not follow the order of history. It comes in as a description set between Genesis 9 and 11. It mattered greatly that we should have certainty from God here. Men had no proper record and no reliable tradition. Their pride was quick to hide or forget a judgment from God that rebuked it.

Before the flood no such distinctions existed. However large the population, the people were neither grouped together nor marked off from one another... God had not yet set up government, there was no division into nations, and there was no difference of language.

In that day men had one speech and one language. It led them to judge that they were strong, and that with a little skill and effort they might grow stronger still, even to independence from God. The materials at hand in the plain of Shinar looked very promising.

They set to work to build a city and a tower, so that they might make a name for themselves. It was not to get out of reach of another flood, as some say, for that is the greatest nonsense possible. It was to be a great central temple to their own name. Babel was in principle apostasy, because it was a name for themselves instead of God. It is man uniting for himself.

Up to this time there was only one language. In the world today men wish they could have this advantage, but God is wiser than men. Men desire this for the very same reason that caused God to impose various languages upon them. They are infected by a pride that wants to unite independently of God, so as to have a great civilization.

There are at least 900 languages on the earth, and this is a huge difficulty for those who argue from the many tongues we have now... These family groups differ sharply from each other. Yet study has shown clear proofs of a common relationship between them. Such proofs cannot be accidental. They point to one source. So scholars were driven to a conclusion that most of them neither expected nor wanted... that these languages point back to a time when only one and the same tongue was spoken.

In the time of the apostles, so many different languages on the earth were a serious obstacle. The apostles had been sent into all the world to preach the gospel, and this made the work slow and hard. But right at the start God showed these servants of the Lord that the difficulty was nothing against the power of the Spirit of God. In a moment He was able to give the disciples power to speak to men in their own language about the "wonderful works of God."

The ancient name of the plain lying in the south between the Euphrates and the Tigris. It was where Nimrod established his kingdom, and where the tower of Babel was built... Later it was called Chaldea, or Babylonia, and some of the captives from Judah were carried there.

The Hebrew is Babel, the same for Babel and Babylon. Genesis 11:2 speaks of Babel being built in a plain in the land of Shinar, which they reached by travelling from the east. The margin reads travelling "eastward," a reading preferred by many, and by the revisers of the English Bible. This direction agrees well with the location of Babylon on the river Euphrates.

Genesis 11 gives a vivid picture. There men "journeyed" indeed, but not as pilgrims — or only as pilgrims until they could find some smooth place to settle down in. "They journeyed" as colonists or immigrants on the lookout for land, from the rough hills where human life after the flood began. "From the east" means with their backs toward the blessed dawn. And "they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there."

The whole human family journeyed together. They left the mountainous regions and went down to the plain. This shows their moral descent. They turned away from God, even though they knew Him.

Human history had started again under Noah in the mountainous region of Ararat. Now they found themselves on a flat, dull plain with no commanding heights. So they would build themselves a city around a tower of immense height, and make a name for themselves.

By the terms of the divine command men were to "be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth." To obey this, they had to scatter. How else could they fill "the earth"? But against this command of God the will of men rose up rebelliously. They would concentrate, and so consolidate their power and importance.

But mankind, though awed by that judgment, had no care to do His will. Their mind was to keep together. And they picked their region well. Great rivers on either side and rich soil made it the ideal place for their purpose: to make themselves a universal republic without God... They were without excuse. They had the witness to God's eternal power and divinity. They also had the knowledge of God that Noah, a "preacher of righteousness," professed and testified, backed by the flood itself, still fresh in their memory.

They are seen carrying the ephah to the land of Shinar, the place and the home of open opposition to God (see Genesis 11:2). There this embodiment of wickedness would have a house of its own, and be set on her own base.

They have left the mountains and come down to the easier life of the plain. There the same effort and endurance are not called for. Instead of trusting God, they follow what looks like their own short-term advantage. They realize there is strength in unity, but they do not seek unity as in subjection to God. On the plain, of course, they found no stone for building, so they made brick from the available clay. They "had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar." The Lord points to these substitutions because He builds with stone — with "living stones." Believers are His workmanship, not the work of men's hands, and He uses the mortar of the Holy Spirit to join them together. Of course brick does not last as stone does, because it is man-made.

Building a city and a tower with its top in the heavens is beyond the power of one man. Men can do it easily enough if they join together. So combining forces became the order of the day. "Come, let us make bricks," they said. And again, "Come, let us build." At last the Lord Himself said, "Come, let us go down and there confuse their language."

The first time we have mention of bricks in Scripture is at Babel, Gen. 11:3. The next time they are mentioned is in Egypt, Ex. 1:14. Bricks speak of human material, man's imitation of stone, which is divine material. Both of these false systems, the religious and the political, use human material. Both have raised their heads to give glory to men. In Babel it is "a name"; in Egypt it is "treasure cities."

They "had brick for stone, and bitumen for mortar." It looks good, and in the fine climate of those regions it lasts a long time. But it is human material, not divine: "brick" is man's manufacture, standing in for "stone," which is God's material. They cannot build great Babylon with the "living stones" of God's producing. These are man-made Christians, pressed together. The Spirit does not cement them for eternity. Human motives and influences hold them, the kind that sway crowds — and one day the fire of God will test them. So is great Babylon built.

They said, "Come, let us build ourselves a city and a tower with its top in the heavens." They never got there. They were wanting to get there by brick and mortar. How does God take us to heaven? He puts Christ there first, and then sends the Holy Spirit to link us with Him in heaven. Some people think today that they will get to heaven by "brick and mortar," that is, by hard work for salvation. Works, rites, and ceremonies take the place of Christ in their struggle to get to heaven. Christ is God's way to heaven. Faith, not works, can alone take you there.

Men thought it was "Bab-il" but it turned out to be "Babel." They dreamed they were passing through the golden gate to godhood, in one form or another. It may have been by making themselves gods. In the end, though, they had to learn the hard way. Their bricks and bitumen were only a slimy gate to folly and confusion.

The tower was not only a guard against scattering. It was tied to their purpose of making themselves "a name" — their fame would spread through the earth and dominate it. This brings us to the great feature that marked Babel from the start, and that is stamped on Babylon all through Scripture: the glorification of man. These early men after the flood had no thought of God as the proper end and object of their existence. So they put themselves there instead. It was "let us build OURSELVES a tower," and "let us make a name for OURSELVES." Their course is plain enough. First unbelief. Then rebellion against the feared judgment of God. Then they set themselves up as the great centre-piece of the picture, so that everything on earth might serve their pleasure and glory.

They had one united purpose, independent of God — in fact, in defiance of His will that they should fill the earth. But what was their aim? Aim is what mainly shapes a man's acts and life. There is no need to think more was meant by their ambition than by the discouraging report of the spies in Deuteronomy 1:28: "the cities are great and fortified up to heaven."

The tower was to be very high, "to heaven." They had no thought of actually reaching heaven. But it showed the lofty imagination of man's heart: the desire to make himself a name, and to form a gathering point that would stop them scattering.

As yet the whole earth had one language, and to this they would add another bond. A city and a tower should be their central point, and the place where they would reunite if any difference arose among them. It was Satan's work, his attempt to cancel the purpose of God, who will head up all things in Christ. His aim was to centre everything in himself. But Christ is to be the centre to whom all men shall turn — not the city and tower of Babel, but the city of Jerusalem and Zion, where He is.

The order is instructive and important. God's thought for man is weakness, dependence, subjection — and so, blessing. To bring this about, they are to be scattered abroad over the earth. But of all things, man's pride refuses to admit weakness, and his will resents subjection. He covets power and a name. "Union is strength" is his watchword.

Their fear had been "lest we be scattered." One single act of Almighty power, and "from there the LORD dispersed them over the face of all the earth." The thing was so obvious that men themselves named the spot Babel, which means "confusion."

Note the LORD's word to Abram in Genesis 12:2, "I will make your name great." Compare it with men's ambitious work in chapter 11:4, "let us make a name for ourselves." Men's schemes — whether the Tower of Babel or any other — come to an end. The names of those who plan them and work them through perish with the world they belong to. But the man who identifies himself with what is God's gets a name that will last for ever. Far better to let God make our name great than to seek anything for ourselves in a scene like this.

They thought their building would keep them from being scattered over the earth. But they defeated their own aim, because this is why God scattered them. He "came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built" (v.5). Of course He could see this without coming down. But His coming down shows how real His interest is in men's affairs. It hints that He comes close enough to know everything their work involves.

He who is not the Creator only but the moral governor, Jehovah, came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of man had built. No designation suited the occasion but this. For He is the One who concerned Himself with all who stood in moral relation with Him. He had breathed the breath of life into the nostrils of their first father. By telling the story this way, He would also impress His people with His calm and full judicial survey of men's ways. Yet He knew it all from the beginning (ver. 5). God was in none of their thoughts.

He knew perfectly well without calling after him in the garden of Eden; but it is for us that He reveals it in this way... when men unite to build a city and a tower in the land of Shinar, or when the cry of Sodom and Gomorrah is great, He comes down to see whether things are as bad as they seem. All things are naked and open to His eyes. But God would teach us a serious lesson: never rush to judge evil. He knows well how hasty we often are... He loves patience in judgment.

It is characteristic of man in his pride and rebellion to aim at building a tower which will reach to heaven. In this an important principle may find illustration. Man's blessing is not found through his efforts to reach up to God, but through God coming down to him.

So men began once more to lift themselves up in mind and achievement, and the great JEHOVAH "came down." He saw their works and their projects. He recognised their unity expressed in the oneness of their language. He foresaw what this oneness could lead to and where it would end. So judgment came from Him — a judgment quite different from the one they expected and were arming themselves against. They never saw it coming. He simply confused their language, so that they no longer understood one another's speech. At once their union, their organisation, their central power and their building project collapsed.

He came down and visited Adam, but there was great reserve. Innocence was short-lived, and sin soon ended that state for ever. He visited Abraham and talked with him; that was brief as well. He visited Israel, coming down on the fiery mountain; but darkness and distance marked that period. What I had chiefly in mind, though, was the time when man set up that first great tower of independence in this world — the tower of Babel.

Jehovah is not only the Creator but the moral governor. He came down to see the city and the tower that the sons of men were building. No other name suited the occasion... By telling it this way He also impresses His people with His calm, full, judicial survey of men's ways — though He knew it all from the beginning. God was in none of their thoughts. They never thought of a temple to His honour being a centre for themselves. They built no altar to Jehovah, as Noah did on coming out of the ark. They did not call on His name, nor did they seek His will.

This is remarkable testimony to what united man can do. Man is fallen, and sin has damaged some of his faculties. Yet leave him alone, and nothing will hold him back. Even now one shared purpose binds men together, despite their quarrels. Under one master mind, with one aim before them, they stand together against all opposition: union makes strong. Why prevent this?... Because sin was there, and the increase of power would be the increase of sin.

Man does not want anyone to rule him. He joins with others to make himself completely independent of God. Joined with others, he thinks he can do anything. "Union," he says, "is strength." And this is true until God intervenes. Men join together to make a name for themselves on earth. That is the spirit of association... God recognises (Gen. 11:6) the power of the principle of association; but this is the proper principle of Babylon.

The language of Jehovah confirms all this as the truth; not a word here points to strange gods or idols... It was a godless joining together, not false worship... They had not paid attention to Him but had forgotten Him. Their own union would be their strength, and a name of renown on earth.

The ancients entertained the imagination of men flying like birds. A century ago people wrote novels about men travelling under the sea. The imagination was there, but would it ever become fact? It did not look like it! Yet the Lord had said that nothing they imagined doing would be held back from them. We have reached the twentieth century after Christ, and look — these things are done.

Without the confusion of language the atom bomb would have arrived far earlier in history. Mankind would have all but destroyed itself long ago. The Governor of the nations acted in judgment at Babel. We can thank Him that He did, because His judgment held mercy inside it.

Their purpose had been centralization, so that they would not be scattered. The Divine act produced in the simplest possible way the very thing they aimed at preventing.

Even the day of grace met the sin and rose above the judgment, in God's wise way. He did not cancel the judgment or wipe out the sin. Instead He gave the apostles power at Pentecost to speak to men in the languages they were born into — to their amazement. So He proclaimed His grace among the evidences of His judgment, using the tokens of judgment themselves as channels of His grace. Go where we may, the differences of languages meet us, and proclaim God's rebuke of man's pride and ambition.

"Go to," they said, "let us build." "Go to" has a strange old-world sound in our ears. The expression we should use today is "Come on"... Until the Lord Himself finally said, "Come on, let us go down and there confuse their language."

It is well known that we can go back with the light of New Testament revelation and see certain hints of a Trinity in the Godhead in the Old Testament. They come out in passages such as Genesis 3:22, Genesis 11:7, Numbers 6:23-26, and perhaps also Isaiah 6:3.

Jehovah came down to see what man was doing, and His verdict on what men can do is surprising. This is remarkable testimony as to what united man can do. Man is fallen, and sin has damaged some of his powers. Yet if no one stops him, nothing he plans will be out of reach... Why prevent this? Why does God say, "Let us go down, and there confuse their language"? Because sin was there, and the increase of power would be the increase of sin.

The language of Jehovah confirms all this as the truth; not a word here points to strange gods or idols... It was a godless union, not false worship... They had not heeded Him but forgotten Him. Their own union would be their strength, and a name of renown on earth.

He recognised their unity expressed in the oneness of their language. He foresaw what this oneness could lead to and where it would end. So judgment came from Him — a judgment nothing like the one they had expected and were arming themselves against. It took them by surprise. He simply confused their language, so that they did not understand one another's speech. At once their union, their organisation, their central control and their building project collapsed.

This is how mankind spread everywhere after the flood. It happened after some time had passed, not willingly, but under the pressure of divine power. It confused them so thoroughly and so quickly that they might well dread the outcome of any further effort to disobey. So nationalities began, each with its own tongue, in their lands, but as mercy ruled, according to their families. There was no confusion in Jehovah's ordering.

We live in an age that is unfolding the implications of Genesis 11:6 before our eyes. Without the confusion of language, the atom bomb would have arrived far earlier in the world's history. Mankind would have very nearly destroyed itself long ago. The Governor of the nations acted in judgment at Babel, and we can thank Him that He did so, since His judgment held mercy inside it.

The reversals of the curse of Babel stand out most of all, because of their gracious character... At Babel the builders all spoke the same language, but they were all fatally in the wrong, so God confused their speech. At Pentecost every man heard the wonderful works of God in his own language, and they "continued praising God." "Let us make a name for ourselves" produced the confusion and scattering of Babel. The Pentecostal secret was another name: "There is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved." That name removed the language barrier and revealed the power that gathers.

Mankind inevitably scattered into language groups, and the building of Babel stopped. Each person had to go with those who spoke as he did. Each language group separated itself from the others, who became foreigners to it. So this one act of God, the fruit of His wisdom and power, brought the plans of men to nothing. Their aim had been to hold together in one place, so that they would never scatter. The divine act produced, in the simplest possible way, the very thing they aimed at preventing.

So men began once more to lift themselves up in mind and achievement, and the great Jehovah "came down." He saw their works and their projects. He recognised their unity expressed in the oneness of their language. He foresaw what this oneness could lead to, and how it would end. Then judgment came from Him. It was a judgment quite unlike the one they had expected and were arming themselves against. It caught them unawares.

They left off building their city. When God steps in, man's work always comes to a sudden stop. It will always be so.

Meanwhile Jehovah would bring their pride to nothing. He would scatter them by a means as simple as it was effective. There He would confuse their language, so that they could not understand one another's speech. Then they would have to scatter, just as they feared. But what mercy there was in their scattering! They did not lose a hair of their heads.

It was mercy to confuse their language. God would still, by His restraining power, keep the surge of evil in check. If nothing restrained him, what would man be? What has he shown himself to be, even with many restraints on him? But if there was mercy in restraining evil, there was also judgment in confusing their language. Their thinking and their actions were rebellion against God. The confusion of tongues shows both mercy and judgment. From then on, divisions, hatred, and war mark the history of man.

It was Jehovah who confused their language. Men would no longer be one. From then on they lived divided into nations. Yet mercy took care that the new languages did not break up their families. It was Jehovah's doing. It was not nature, not circumstances, not development. It was an act of divine power, plainly a judgment, and it lasted.

Just when men were aiming at unity, God brought in scattering. Soon after, He called Abraham. Men were saying "Come on!" God said to Abraham, "Get out!" They were urging people to join together; God commanded separation, and Abraham obeyed. When men had their city and their tower, Abraham had a tent and an altar. In their cities men look for what is settled and permanent. A tent belongs to a life that is only passing through. Men build a tower to give security and defence, as far as men can. But an altar speaks of God, and of keeping contact with Him.

In Genesis 11 God sent divided tongues in judgment. In Acts 2 He sent divided tongues in grace. The blessed God of all grace would have each one hear of full salvation, and hear it in the very language in which, as a baby, he first heard a mother's love — his own native language. God had once given divided tongues to scatter in judgment. Now He gave them again to gather in grace — not now around an earthly tower, but around a heavenly Christ.

In Genesis 10:10 it is the name of the first place mentioned as the beginning of Nimrod's kingdom. In Genesis 11:9 the tower and city are called "Babel." God confused the language of man there, so that they did not understand one another. The tower was to be very high, "to the heavens." They had no thought of really reaching heaven. But it showed the proud ambition of man's heart. They wanted to make a name for themselves, and to form a gathering point that would hold them together. God would not allow this, for man no sooner has power than he begins to abuse it. He could not let them, as one family, exalt their own name, for the Lord's name alone is to be exalted.

Those who have studied the subject give the name a second meaning: "Bab-il," which means "gate of God." This looks like one of those plays on words that are common in Scripture. Their purpose is to catch the reader's attention. Men thought it was "Bab-il," but it turned out to be "Babel." They dreamed they were walking through a golden gate and becoming divine in some way. In the end, they had to learn the hard way that their bricks and tar were only a muddy gate to folly and confusion.

The inevitable result was that mankind scattered into language groups, and the building of Babel stopped. Each person had to go with those who spoke as he did. Each language group separated from the others. Those others were now foreigners to it, and at first no one could hold an intelligent conversation with them. So by this one act of God, the fruit of His wisdom and power, the plans of men came to nothing. Their purpose had been to gather in one centre and never scatter. The divine act produced, in the simplest possible way, the very thing they were trying to prevent.

It was mercy to confuse their language. God would still, by His restraining power, keep the surge of evil in check. If nothing restrained man at all, what would he be? What has he shown himself to be, despite many restraints?… But if there was mercy in restraining evil, there was also judgment in confusing their language. Their thought and their action were rebellion against God. The confusion of tongues shows both mercy and judgment. They said, "lest we be dispersed over the face of the whole earth." What they feared comes upon them — they are scattered.

Yet it was a dealing tempered with wisdom and mercy, for each language was spoken by the same clan. They did not part from their families. That could easily have happened, if God had willed it. Instead they spread abroad by their family lines, and national history began this way in their various lands.

Babylon means confusion. At Babel man made his first organised effort to act apart from God, and so God confused it. It afterwards became the head of the Gentile powers that laid Jerusalem waste. So it often stands for them all… It began in independence of God. It continued as the oppressor of God's people. It fell while using the vessels of God's temple to honour its own idols.

In Genesis 11 divided tongues were sent in judgment. In Acts 2 divided tongues were sent in grace. The blessed God of all grace would have each one hear of full salvation. He would have him hear it in the very words in which his infant ears had listened to the earliest whispers of a mother's love — "in his own tongue in which he was born"… Divided tongues had once been given to scatter in judgment. Now they were given again to gather in grace — not around an earthly tower, but around a heavenly Christ; not for the exaltation of man, but for the glory of God.