The Table of Nations

Let me take a moment to set appropriate expectations for this text today. First, let’s remember we don’t skip passages in scripture – primarily because as Paul writes, “all scripture is inspired by God and is profitable” (2 Tim 3:16). Second, I’m not going to pretend this passage provides some of the most insightful and practical guidance for our Christian walks. As one pastor wrote, “If I could choose one chapter from the Bible to take with me to a desert island, it would not be Genesis 10. It is history at its most bare; it lists names and people whom we no longer know or care about.”[1] I won’t go so far as to agree with Leupold who argues, “It may very well be questioned whether a man should ever preach on a chapter such as this…. such a sermon might have too little gospel content.”[2] However, I would disagree with Boice when he describes Genesis 10 as “a chapter that is surely one of the most interesting and important in the entire Word of God.”[3] Leupold undervalues the text and Boice over sells it.

Broad observations

Individuals, cities, clans, and nations. This genealogy varies from the typical genealogy in which a father who had a son and lived so many years – and so on. In contrast, Moses lists both individuals, families, cities, clans, and nations. For instance, Peleg and Nimrod (and of course Noah’s three sons) were all individuals. However, the Kittim, Dodanim, Mizraim, Ludim, Ananim, etc. were all tribal names. Other people groups or nations are noted by the name of their city – Jebusites (all the “ites” in 10:16-17) – but also cities such as Babylon, Erech, Akkad (10:10), Nineveh (10:12), and Sodom and Gomorrah (10:19).

Because Moses chooses to present the names of the genealogy in this manner, he avoids adding the typical dates to each name. Most genealogies include the number of years an individual lived and sometimes gives the age of the father when he had his son and the years he lived afterward. Understandably, this genealogy lacks all those years.

Amount of emphasis. Moses emphasizes particular sons of Noah by the amount of time spent discussing them. For instance, Moses summarizes all the families of Japheth in five verses with no additional comment. Even though, Japheth spreads throughout more of the world than any other of Noah’s sons, Moses discusses Japheth less because Japheth’s children would play a less significant role in Israel’s history.

Similarly, the families of Shem are discussed less than Ham (35%) but more than Japheth because they played a more significant role in Israel’s history than did the offspring of Japheth.

However, Moses discusses Ham for nearly 50 percent (48%) of the chapter. Ham fathers all those coming from Egypt and Canaan – two incredibly significant nations in Israel’s history. Additionally, amid the discussion of Ham, Moses takes a notable amount of time to discuss Nimrod, one of Ham’s descendants. In fact, more time is spent on Nimrod than any other individual in the chapter.

Chapter ten in light of chapters nine and eleven. First, the table of nations in chapter ten ought to be read and understood in light of the Tower of Babel in chapter eleven. Chronologically, the story of the Tower of Babel in chapter eleven occurs amid the spread of the nations in chapter ten. Chapter eleven offers the reason that the nations of chapter ten spread the way they did. Originally (at least close to the beginning), all the people came together, in direct disobedience to God’s command to Noah and his sons to populate and fill the earth (9:1). Instead, they chose to migrate to the East and “make a name for themselves (11:4), specifically so that they would not “be dispersed over the face of the whole earth” (11:4). Ross describes the potential motivation of the people. “It thus appears that the human family was striving for unity, security, and social immortality (making a name) in defiance of God’s desire for them to fill the earth (9:1).”[4]Therefore, to suppress their combined wickedness which would once again require universal judgment, God divides them by confusing their languages.

In chapter eleven, Moses discusses God’s method of dividing and spreading out the people of the world. Chapter ten indirectly outlines where those people went. I say indirectly because the text does not tell us where the people went, but other biblical texts and extra biblical literature informs us as to where these clans, nations, and cities were located. As a result, we can know where the families of Noah’s three sons journeyed.

A bookend. 9:1 and 10:32 offer bookends of sorts. In 9:1, Moses writes, “God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, ‘be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth’” (Gen 9:1). In 10:32, Moses writes, “these are the clans of the sons of Noah, according to their genealogies, in their nations, and from these the nations spread abroad on the earth after the flood” (Gen 10:32).

The Generations of Japheth

The brevity of this portion points to its lack of importance to Israel’s story. However, Japheth’s family appears to be the most significant regarding the population spreading throughout the world. Ezekiel acknowledges how the families of Japheth journeyed to “the uttermost parts of the North” (Eze 38:6). From there they spread both West to Asia Minor and the Greek islands and East as the Medes and Cimmerians. [This spread explains the similarities found within the Indo-European languages.] Although less significant to Israel’s history, this immense spread offers evidence of the blessing given to Japheth by Noah in chapter nine. Noah blesses Japheth and says, “May God enlarge Japheth, and let him dwell in the tents of Shem, and let Canaan be his servant” (9:27).

The Generations of Ham

As you likely notice, the length of this section indicates the emphasis of this chapter as well as the impact of Ham’s offspring on the people of Israel. Ham’s offspring are both the closest neighbors to Israel but as well the most oppressive enemies to Israel.

Cush, typically understood to be Ethiopia. Quite consistently, commentators agree that Cush refers to those clans and tribes that migrated south of Egypt.[5] In a moment we will further discuss Nimrod, who came from Cush.

Egypt (and Put). While we all understand the significance of Egypt’s connection to Israel, at this point, Moses simply acknowledges Egypt and his sons as a line of Ham. One significant emendation finds its way into the text, maybe by a later editor. The text acknowledges Egypt as one “from whom the Philistines came” (10:14).

Additionally, Put likely migrated south with those in Egypt but maybe moved even further into modern day Somalia. The author only mentions Put as a son of Ham but offers no following generations. “Josephus too understands [Put] it as Lybia. Nahum 3:9 distinguishes it from Lybia (Egypt, Put, the Lybians). It has been equated therefore with the Egyptian Punt, on the Somali coast, west of the Red Sea.”[6]

Canaan, those West of Jordan, especially in the coastal plain. Simply put, Moses outlines the nations that populated Canaan, the land that they would one day possess as part of God’s blessings and promises to Abraham.

Nimrod emphasized. The genealogy emphasizes Nimrod more than any other. Note the potentially tragic irony connected to Nimrod. He is “a mighty hunter before the Lord,” however, he also fathers Babylon and Nineveh.[7]

The phrase “before the Lord” leaves most readers with some uncertainty. Typically, we may consider such a statement as a positive trait. However, the entire section concerning Nimrod seems to be cast in a negative light. (1) Possibly, Moses intends to use the phrase as a superlative. In other words, Nimrod was remarkable or stood out from the others, and the phrase offers no approval or disapproval.[8] (2) Potentially, the phrase simply acknowledges that any strength or power ultimately flows from God’s grace.[9] In the same way God guided Cyrus, a pagan king, God empowered Nimrod. Afterall, the heart of the king in the hands of God (Prov 21:1). Chrysostom, the early church father, likely agreed with this interpretation. He wrote the following:

Chrysostom. While some people say the phrase “before the Lord” means being in opposition to God, I on the contrary do not think sacred Scripture is implying this. Rather, it implies that [Nimrod] was strong and brave. But the phrase “before the Lord” means created by him, receiving from him God’s blessing.[10]

Finally, in his commentary, James Murphy concludes “before the Lord” suggest, “not merely that the Lord was cognizant of his proceedings… but that Nimrod himself made no secret of his designs, pursued them with a bold front and a high hand, and at the same time was aware of the name and will of Jehovah.”[11]While I think Murphy is correct, this seems to impose a bit on the text.

Taking into consideration all the context, the inclusion of Babel (and the following story), Nineveh, Assyria, and a likely negative connotation to him being a “mighty man” and “mighty hunter,” I concur with Luther’s simple conclusion. “Nimrod was the first after the Flood to strive for the sovereignty of the world.”[12]

The Generations of Shem

Typically, in considering Noah’s sons, we would likely place Shem as the middle son – hence, the couple times we read of Ham, Shem, and Japheth. However, in this chapter, we find a different order. Japheth’s descendants spread more than any other of Noah’s sons but play a less significant role in Israel’s history. The descendants of Ham play a profound role in Israel’s history as the primary nemesis to Israel, therefore, Moses spends significant time in addressing them. However, Moses places Shem, the middle child, at the end of this table of nations. Shem plays the most significant role of Noah’s sons because through Shem all the covenant promises will be fulfilled.

It is placed last because Shem fathers the elect line, and the chosen line is always dealt with last.[13]

Moses acknowledges the descendants of Japheth and Ham in chapter ten, but from now on, the emphasis of genealogies will flow from Shem – and most significantly from his distant grandson Abraham, mentioned in chapter 12.

The earth divided. Moses offers very little additional commentary concerning Shem’s offspring. However, let me point out one additional phrase. In verse twenty-five we read, “To Eber were born two sons: the name of the one was Peleg, for in his days the earth was divided.” While this phrase may reference a few different meanings, likely Eber names his son Peleg due to him being born around the time of the separation of people from the tower of Babel. Possibly this phrase refers to something as dramatic as a catastrophic earthquake or less dramatic as the division of two Semitic people groups or even less dramatic as an irrigation canal. Simply, we can’t be too decisive, but chapter eleven seems to offer the most logical explanation for Peleg’s inclusion.[14]

Conclusion

Moses accomplishes a few things by means of chapter ten. First, Moses introduces to the biblical narrative many, if not most, of the significant people groups throughout scripture - especially those who played a significant role in Israel’s history.

At the beginning of chapter ten, the question remains. Through whom will God fulfill his promise to Eve to provide an offspring who will crush the enemy? Canaan has been cursed, therefore, someone must come through the line of Japheth or Shem to fulfill this promise. While Moses introduces all the relevant nations to the next period of history; he also, by discussing Shem last, narrows the group of people to Shem’s line through whom the promises will be fulfilled. This broad people group narrows even more, when in chapter twelve, Moses introduces Abraham. God covenants with Abraham to make him a great nation and through Abraham “all the families of the earth shall be blessed” (Gen 12:3b).

Second, chapter ten offers an overview of how God orchestrated his plan and command to Noah to be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. Mankind had other plans, but God will accomplish his purpose regardless our feeble attempts to ignore or stop him.

Third, Nimrod offers one example of the apostle Paul’s intent in 1 Corinthians 10. In 1 Corinthians 10, Paul discusses the value of learning from the experiences of people in the past. He writes, “Now these things took place as examples for us, that we might not desire evil as they did” (1 Cor 10:6). And a few verses later he adds, “Now these things happened to them as an example, but they were written down for our instruction, on whom the end of the ages has come” (1 Cor 10:11). Moses offers Nimrod as one such example. And, through Nimrod, we learn to avoid attempting to foil the plans of God.

God had commanded man to be fruitful, multiply, and fill the earth. However, Nimrod refused to follow this command. Nimrod was the father of Babel. In chapter eleven, Moses informs us of the intent of those building the tower of Babel. They determined to build a city so that they could “make a name for [themselves], lest [they] be dispersed over the face of the whole earth” (Gen 11:4). Nimrod refused to obey God’s command to fill the earth, but I surmise he also desired to avoid the curse that had been placed on his forefather Canaan. Canaan had been cursed to a position of servitude, and Nimrod purposed to be anything other than a slave. In fact, he proved to be the first mighty man on earth. Nimrod led men and formed around him a people that purposed to “make a name for themselves.”

Boice. This is the normal reaction of the human spirit when faced with God’s curse. It says, “I’ll defy it. I’ll take care of my own problems.” So it creates the arts, raises an army, builds its cities, and marches out to make a name for itself in defiance of God’s decrees. But God’s decrees are not overturned this way. God’s curse is not successfully defied. There is only one way we can escape God’s curse, and that is at the point where God takes the curse on himself.[15]

Mankind still attempts to do life in a way that is contrary to God’s expectations, and mankind continues to refuse to accept and reckon with the curse. All mankind is born into a state of sin and misery. We attempt to overcome this by “making a name for ourselves” and accomplishing great tasks – all in an effort to overcome the curse. Only Christ has overcome the curse.

Purpose statement. While man attempts to foil the inevitable and avoid the curse, God orchestrates his plan, unhindered.

Footnotes

[1]Steven J. Cole, “Lesson 22: The Roots of the Nations (Genesis 10:1–32),” in Genesis, ed. Steven J. Cole, Steven J. Cole Commentary Series (Dallas: Galaxie Software, 2017), Ge 10:1–32. [2] H. C. Leupold, Exposition of Genesis(Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1942), 380. [3] Boice, Genesis, 1:418. [4] Ross, Creation and Blessing, 233–34. [5] Wenham writes, “’Cush’ lies to the south of Egypt, and is traditionally translated “Ethiopia,” following LXX, but it probably covers a variety of dark-skinned tribes (cf. Jer 13:23) living beyond the southern border of Egypt.” Westermann writes of the “land south of Egypt, Nubia, in Greek, Ethiopia.”[5] Hamilton offers a little bit more. “Cushrepresents the area of northeast Africa. The Greek appellation for it is Nubia. The LXX uses two forms for Cush: chouswhen it refers to the sons of Ham, and aithiopiain other instances. It is questionable whether one is dealing here with a homonymous Cush: an Ethiopian Cush (v. 6), a North Arabian Cush (v. 7), and a Kassite Cush (v. 8), to be discussed below.” [Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 1:221; Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 510; Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 1-17, 336.] [6] Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 510–11. [7] Westermann. “Moreover there is a third observation: the sentence that has been appended in v. 14, generally regarded as a marginal note, ‘from whom the Philistines came.’” Mathews. “To complicate the problem is the troublesome issue of early references in the patriarchal narratives to the “Philistines” (21:32, 34; 26:1, 8, 14–18), whose presence in Canaan would antedate by centuries the arrival of the Philistines as indicated by Egyptian sources (ca. 1300–1200 b.c.).” [Westermann, 519; Mathews, Genesis 1-11:26, 1A:453.] [8] Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 1:223; Mathews, Genesis 1-11:26, 1A:450. [9] Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 1-17, 339. [10] Louth and Conti, Genesis 1-11, 165. [11] Murphy, Notes on the Old Testament: Genesis, 224. [12] George, Timothy, Manetsch, and Thompson, Genesis 1-11, 1:325. [13] Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 1:227. [14] Oddly enough, as a pastor, Boice seems to discuss Peleg the most and offers as many alternatives as any other commentator. He does conclude that likely Peleg references the separation at the tower of Babel. Wenham hardly considers alternate meanings than “the dispersal of nations at Babel.” Uncharacteristically, Westermann offers the least discussion and concludes, “In one sentence it ascribes an event to the generation designated by the name. What is meant is something like what is described in 11:1–9, although one cannot say whether this remark in the genealogy has this or another intent.” Both Kidner and Mathews offer the possibility of a canal or territorial divisions, and Mathews includes the possibility of an earthquake. In the end, Mathews, like the majority, consider the Tower of Babel “the more likely viewpoint, but this linkage cannot be dogmatically held since there is no clear allusion to 11:1–9 because “scattered” (pûṣ) and “divided” (niplĕgâ)are different words.” [Boice, Genesis, 1:417–18; Wenham, Genesis 1-15, 1:230–31; Westermann, Genesis 1-11, 526; Hamilton, The Book of Genesis, Chapters 1-17, 345; Kidner, Genesis, 1:117; Mathews, Genesis 1-11:26, 1A:463.] [15] Boice, Genesis, 1:413.