Please Help Us Keep These Thousands of Blog Posts Growing and Free for All

$5.00

Nimrod, a figure who first emerges in the annals of human history in the aftermath of the Flood, marks a critical turning point in the unfolding of human civilization. Genesis 10:8-11 illuminates his character and his actions: “Cush was the father of Nimrod, who became a mighty one on the earth. He was a mighty hunter before Jehovah; that is why it is said, ‘Like Nimrod, a mighty hunter before Jehovah.’ The first centers of his kingdom were Babylon, Uruk, Akkad, and Calneh, in Shinar. From that land, he went to Assyria, where he built Nineveh, Rehoboth Ir, Calah.”

Nimrod was a mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah. Lit in front of or before, but in the sense of defiance of and opposition to, as in the case of the same expression in Num. 16:2; Josh. 7:12-13; 1 Ch 14:8; 2 Ch 14:10; Job 23:4. Some Bible scholars attach a favorable sense to the Hebrew preposition meaning in front of or before, the Jewish Targums, the writings of the historian Josephus, and also the context of Genesis chapter 10 suggest that Nimrod was a mighty hunter in opposition to Jehovah.

The brief mention of Nimrod in the Scripture is loaded with clues about his nature and his impact on early human society. The Hebrew term “גבר” (Gibbor), translated as ‘mighty one,’ implies not only physical prowess but also influence and power. As the ‘first to become a potentate on earth,’ Nimrod became a leader, a ruler, and an influential figure, ushering in a new era of human self-governance that contrasted with God’s original intent of divine guidance and governance.

Being identified as a ‘mighty hunter’ speaks volumes about Nimrod’s disposition. While on the surface, it may refer to his capability of hunting wild beasts, the phrase ‘in opposition to Jehovah’ suggests a more profound implication. Nimrod wasn’t merely a hunter of animals but possibly a ‘hunter’ of men, expanding his kingdom through force and subjugation, imposing his will upon others, thereby asserting human authority where divine authority was meant to be supreme.

Nimrod’s exploits didn’t stop with his kingdom in Shinar, which included cities like Babel, Erech, and Accad. He expanded his rule into Assyria and built cities like Nineveh, Rehoboth-Ir, and Calah. This expansion further highlights Nimrod’s ambition to establish his authority, creating an empire that stretched across regions, possibly being the first post-Flood empire of such scale.

Babel, the first center of his kingdom, is of significant importance as it becomes the site of the infamous Tower of Babel. In Genesis 11:4, the people state their aim: “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.” This attitude mirrors the defiant spirit of Nimrod. Building a tower to ‘reach the heavens’ symbolizes a human effort to assert autonomy, to compete with divine power, essentially setting themselves in opposition to God.

These historical actions of Nimrod set the stage for the proliferation of human self-governance and the diversification of religions. In the act of asserting human authority and power, Nimrod and the people under his influence disregarded God’s original intent and guidance, leading to the eventual confusion of languages at Babel (Genesis 11:9). This event marked the dispersion of people and the birth of diverse cultures and religions that deviated from the original worship of Jehovah, the Creator.

The Historical Nimrod and Tower

The existence of Nimrod and the Tower of Babel, as depicted in the Book of Genesis, is a topic that has elicited various scholarly debates, with some trying to equate Nimrod with other historical or mythical figures such as Merodach (Marduk), Gilgamesh, or Orion. However, such attempts often falter as they lack substantial evidence and rely heavily on conjecture. While scholars may not conclusively identify Nimrod with other known historical figures, it is important to understand that the absence of proof is not proof of absence. The Bible’s account stands as the primary source of information about Nimrod.

In Genesis 10:8-12, the Bible provides a brief account of Nimrod, highlighting his stature as a powerful leader and a “mighty hunter before Jehovah.” This mention, albeit brief, gives Nimrod historical significance in the Bible narrative. While the Bible itself serves as historical documentation of Nimrod’s existence, further evidence comes from other cultural traditions and historical references. Arabic traditions, for example, cite Nimrod, suggesting a shared knowledge of this character across cultures. Furthermore, his name, found as Nimrud or Nimroud, is incorporated in various place names in the Near East, indicating a cultural and historical memory of this figure.

Another supporting evidence of Nimrod’s existence is the account of Jewish historian Josephus, who refers to Nimrod by name in his works, demonstrating that knowledge of Nimrod was not confined to the Biblical narrative but extended into broader historical writings. Furthermore, the presence of Nimrod in Sumerian-Akkadian didactic poems underlines his impact and significance in ancient societies.

The existence of the Tower of Babel, associated with Nimrod, is detailed in Genesis 11:4, where it is described as a monumental structure intended to reach the heavens, reflecting humanity’s ambition to “make a celebrated name for themselves” rather than for God. Although archaeologists have yet to identify specific ruins as the Tower of Babel definitively, the architectural similarities between the biblical description and numerous found structures in Mesopotamia are striking.

This style of building, a ziggurat, was a characteristic feature of temple architecture in ancient Mesopotamia. Ziggurats were pyramid-shaped structures with a shrine at the top. The link between these ziggurats and the described tower in Babel is enhanced by the cultural and religious beliefs surrounding these structures. For example, Walter Andrae, a German archaeologist, noted that the shrine at the top of the ziggurat was thought to be the “gate” through which the God of heaven descended to reach his earthly dwelling. This understanding aligns with the people of Babel’s claim that their city’s name meant “Gate of God,” mirroring the biblical narrative of the tower that intended to reach the heavens.

While there may be debates surrounding the identities of Nimrod and the Tower of Babel, the available evidence—biblical, cultural, and architectural—offers a compelling case for their historical existence. They stand as monumental figures and structures that marked a critical juncture in human history, reflecting the shift from divine to human authority, and their influence reverberates through the annals of human civilization.

Nimrod Merges Religion and Politics

The account of Nimrod and the construction of the Tower of Babel in the Book of Genesis provides a vivid example of the far-reaching consequences of actions that reject divine authority. Nimrod, described as a “mighty hunter before Jehovah” in Genesis 10:9, distinguished himself as a notable leader. However, his most enduring legacy wasn’t just his leadership but his pioneering effort to blend politics with religion—a practice that would have significant implications throughout history.

In the account of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1-9), we see the repercussions of Nimrod’s actions. Initially, all the earth’s inhabitants spoke a common language, fostering a unity that, unfortunately, was used to advance human ambition rather than divine will. As they began to build the tower—a symbol of their self-sufficiency and pride—God intervened, confusing their language and scattering them across the earth. The city’s name, Babel, derived from the Hebrew word “ba-lal” (to confuse), poignantly encapsulates the result of their endeavors.

This divine intervention had immediate and far-reaching effects. The builders, once unified in language and purpose, were now isolated in confusion. Imagine their frustration as they found themselves unable to communicate, unable to understand one another, unable to agree on what had transpired. They scattered, taking with them their diverse interpretations of the event and the religious beliefs they held.

As these groups dispersed across the earth, their beliefs and interpretations evolved, influenced by local traditions and events. Despite originating from a single source, these ideas splintered into countless versions, as unique as the cultures that held them. From this vantage point, we can see how Nimrod’s initial blending of politics and religion not only failed but also led to the fragmentation of religious beliefs and practices.

Even today, the repercussions of Nimrod’s actions echo in our interactions with others. In conversations on religion, we see the diversity of belief systems—so much so that the same religious terminology can hold vastly different meanings across faiths. The words “God,” “sin,” “soul,” and “death,” although commonly used, are subject to diverse interpretations based on one’s religious background. This diversity, while enriching in some respects, also presents challenges to mutual understanding and agreement, as John Selden, an English scholar, observed.

To fully comprehend the consequences of Nimrod’s actions, we can look to the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 7:18: “a good tree cannot bear worthless fruit, neither can a rotten tree produce fine fruit.” This principle illuminates the importance of our actions aligning with divine will, for actions that neglect or reject God’s authority, like Nimrod’s, bear fruit that, although far-reaching, is inherently flawed.

The story of Nimrod and the Tower of Babel illustrates the enduring and extensive impact of our actions, particularly when they intersect with matters of faith and governance. It underscores the significance of aligning our actions with divine will, a principle that resonates through the ages, touching the lives of countless individuals across the globe. Even today, we witness the effects of Nimrod’s actions in the diversity and disparity of religious beliefs and practices worldwide—a testament to the lasting legacy of actions that diverge from divine guidance.

The Hanging Gardens of Babylon as depicted by Ferdinand Knab in 1886. According to tradition, the gardens were constructed by Nebuchadnezzar for his wife, Amytis of Babylon, so that she would feel less homesick.

The Effects of the Babylonian Influence

The effects of the Babylonian influence can be traced from the time of Nimrod’s rebellion to the modern era. The events surrounding the Tower of Babel, as outlined in Genesis 11:1-9, had not only immediate implications but also enduring impacts that ripple through human history up to our current day. This legacy manifests itself in a variety of ways, including in the systems of belief that shape our world.

In Babylonian society, we observe a staggering array of deities, with some accounts mentioning as many as 2,500 gods. To bring order to this celestial chaos, Babylonian theologians sorted their gods into triads or groups of three. One of the most prominent triads was Anu, Enlil, and Ea. Another comprised the astral deities Sin, Shamash, and Ishtar, the latter also known as Astarte, a mother-goddess and consort to Tammuz.

Marduk, the paramount god of Babylon, later called Enlil or Bel, represented war—a religious recognition of Babylon’s increasing preoccupation with military exploits. Considering Nimrod’s status as a “mighty hunter,” it’s logical to assume he would have revered a god of war rather than the “God of love and of peace” referenced in 2 Corinthians 13:11.

Another fascinating feature of Babylonian deities was their “human” attributes, possessing the same needs and passions as mortals. This anthropomorphic characterization led to the development of religious rituals and practices—such as temple prostitution—that were decidedly ungodly.

Witchcraft, exorcism, and astrology also found their place within Babylon’s religious framework. The Babylonians, while making significant strides in astronomy, also endeavored to divine the future from the stars. They also held a belief in the immortality of the human soul, signified by burying objects with the deceased for use in the afterlife.

The influence of ancient Babylonian beliefs can be traced in a number of contemporary religions, even if they’re not explicitly recognized or acknowledged. Here are a few examples:

Judaism and Christianity: These religions’ foundational texts, including the Old Testament of the Christian Bible and the Hebrew Bible, include references to Babylon and events that took place there. Some scholars suggest that historical accounts such as the Tower of Babel and the Babylonian exile significantly impacted the development of these religions.
Astrology: While not a religion, astrology can be seen as a spiritual belief system, and it has its roots in ancient Babylonian practices. The Babylonians are often credited with the development of astrology, using their detailed observations of the heavens to predict earthly events. This idea that the positions and movements of celestial bodies can influence human life and events on earth is a central aspect of astrology, which continues to be popular today.
Zoroastrianism: Although not as widely practiced today, Zoroastrianism was one of the largest religions in the world during the time of the ancient Persians. The religion had likely interactions with the Babylonians during periods of conquest and empire-building, which may have led to cross-pollination of religious ideas. Some scholars suggest that concepts like dualism and eschatology in Zoroastrianism may have been influenced by Babylonian beliefs.
Various Neo-Pagan traditions: Some contemporary pagan traditions attempt to reconstruct or draw inspiration from ancient religions, including that of the Babylonians. As a result, you might see elements of Babylonian mythology, ritual, or spiritual practice appearing in these contexts.
Gnosticism: This ancient religious philosophy which influenced many early Christian sects, is said to have elements that can be traced back to Babylonian mythology and cosmology, especially the idea of a world created and ruled by a flawed or evil deity (similar to the Babylonian story of the creation of the world by the god Marduk).
Tolerance of Immorality: Babylonian society, like many ancient societies, had different standards and norms for what was considered moral or immoral compared to contemporary cultures. For instance, their laws, as represented by Hammurabi’s code, could be very harsh by modern standards. The code enforced strict penalties, often physical, for various crimes. Tolerance of what we might call “immorality” today would have been different in that context. In modern religions, differing interpretations about what constitutes “immorality,” how it should be judged, and what role tolerance should play often cause considerable internal debate. It’s a topic that can’t be generalized across all religions or religious individuals. We have religions today that accept homosexuality and transgenderism, even sacrificing our children to the god of gender reassignment surgeries, cutting off body parts, and giving them hormone blockers. Even Satanism has become an acceptable form of worship.
Political Involvement: Babylon was a powerful ancient empire, and the religious, political, and social spheres were all deeply intertwined. Kings were seen as representatives of the gods, and the priesthood held significant power. In modern times, the relationship between religion and politics varies greatly from one society to another and among different religions. In some places, there is a concerted effort to keep the two separate, such as in the United States with the concept of “separation of church and state.” In other societies, religion plays a significant role in political life, with theocratic states like Iran being notable examples.
Propensity for Warfare: Warfare was a common aspect of ancient Babylonian society, which was frequently involved in wars for territory, resources, and power. The gods were often invoked for protection and victory in battle. Today, while most mainstream religions advocate for peace, some religious groups and individuals justify violence with their religious beliefs. These situations are often complex, involving historical, socio-economic, and political factors as well as religious ones.

Revelation, chapters 17 and 18, identifies Babylon as the archetype for the global empire of false religion and political governments, reaffirming the enduring influence of Babylon on religious and societal structures.

However, not everyone succumbed to the religious disarray proliferated by Babel. Abraham, ten generations after Noah, maintained the practice of true worship. God made a covenant with this descendant of Shem, promising in Genesis 22:15-18 that all families of the earth would be blessed in association with the one true religion. This covenant, believed to have been initiated in 1921 B.C.E., further clarified the distinction between the one true faith and the myriad of false religions.

Therefore, as we trace the course of human history from Babel to the modern era, we can see the indelible imprint of Babylon’s religious confusion, persisting through various doctrines and practices in today’s religions. However, alongside this pervasive influence, there remains a strand of true worship, a remnant committed to honoring the God of love and peace, contrasting sharply with the multitude of “daughterlike” organizations that propagate Babylon’s legacy.

Babylon the Great (Robert L. Thomas)

Robert L. Thomas was a respected scholar of the New Testament, and his interpretation of the “Babylon the Great” found in the Book of Revelation is grounded in a premillennial, dispensationalist viewpoint, a perspective that is common among conservative evangelical Bible scholars.

According to Thomas, “Babylon the Great” in the Book of Revelation is symbolic, representing a complex system of religious, economic, and political components that are interconnected and interdependent. This system is characterized by evil and corruption, contributing to spiritual apostasy, economic exploitation, and political tyranny.

In terms of religion, Thomas interprets “Babylon the Great” as emblematic of false religion, an apostate church that has deviated from biblical truth, seducing believers away from their faith. This aspect of Babylon serves as the spiritual or ecclesiastical Babylon.

When it comes to economics, Thomas views “Babylon the Great” as a symbol of rampant materialism and economic exploitation, where wealth is pursued at the expense of spiritual values. This component is often referred to as the commercial or economic Babylon.

On the political front, Thomas sees “Babylon the Great” as a representation of oppressive political systems that persecute God’s people and resist His purposes. This dimension is usually called the political or governmental Babylon.

Overall, for Robert L. Thomas, “Babylon the Great” represents the culmination of human opposition to God, embodying the very essence of rebellion against His sovereignty. It is a metaphor for the world system in its entirety, opposing God and His people, and it is destined for divine judgment as described in Revelation chapters 17 and 18. Please note that interpretation can vary widely among scholars, and the interpretation provided here represents Thomas’s understanding.

Babylon the Great (John F. Walvoord)

John F. Walvoord, a prominent evangelical theologian and eschatological scholar, had a detailed perspective on “Babylon the Great” as described in the Book of Revelation. From a conservative, premillennial, and dispensationalist perspective, he interpreted “Babylon the Great” in a dual sense, both as a literal city and as a symbolic representation.

Walvoord recognized Babylon the Great as a religious entity (the apostate church) and also as a literal city of Babylon that would be rebuilt in the end times. His dual interpretation separates the religious (ecclesiastical) Babylon in Revelation 17 from the political and economic Babylon in Revelation 18.

The ecclesiastical Babylon of Revelation 17, according to Walvoord, represents a false global religious system or apostate church, which would be influential during the Tribulation period prior to Christ’s return. This system is described as a harlot sitting on many waters (nations, peoples, and tongues), representing its worldwide influence. This harlot is also depicted as riding the beast (the Antichrist), indicating her temporary influence over the Antichrist, who would later turn against her.

Regarding the literal city of Babylon, represented in Revelation 18, Walvoord believed in a future rebuilding of the historical city of Babylon on the Euphrates. This would become a center of global economic and political power in the end times. This Babylon represents a world system characterized by economic materialism and political oppression, ultimately judged and destroyed by God.

It’s important to note that interpretations of the symbolic elements in the Book of Revelation vary widely among Bible scholars, and the perspectives provided here are representative of John Walvoord’s particular interpretation.

Legends That Give Credence to the Biblical Account

The Bible’s influence is so pervasive that it extends not only into various aspects of human culture and history, but also into the realm of global folklore and mythology. Numerous legends worldwide seem to reflect, or at least resonate with, key biblical narratives, lending weight to the historicity of the biblical account. This phenomenon becomes particularly apparent when we explore stories that echo the biblical accounts of the Tower of Babel and the Great Flood, as described in Genesis.

In northern Burma, for example, there is a traditional belief that all people originally “lived in one large village and spoke one tongue.” Mirroring the biblical narrative of the Tower of Babel in Genesis 11:1-9, the Burmese legend recounts that these people endeavored to build a tower that would reach the moon. As the tower rose, the builders worked on separate levels, gradually losing touch with one another. Over time, they “acquired different manners, customs, and ways of speech.”

Similarly, the Yenisei-Ostyaks of northern Siberia recount a flood narrative that bears a striking resemblance to Genesis 7-8. In their version, people survived a devastating flood by clinging to floating logs and rafters. After the flood, a mighty north wind scattered these survivors, who then “began, after the flood, to speak different languages and to form different peoples.”

Across the globe, in the ancient civilizations of the Americas, we find additional legends that echo these biblical accounts. The Aztecs believed that “after the Flood a giant built an artificial hill reaching into the clouds,” angering the gods who cast fire or a stone down from heaven in response. This narrative parallels the story of the Tower of Babel, where human pride led to divine intervention.

The Reading Culture of Early Christianity

The Maya legend is also of interest. They believed that Votan, the first human, participated in the construction of a tremendous house that reached the heavens. This structure was “the place where God gave every tribe its particular language,” a theme that directly echoes the account of Babel where God confounded human language to halt their presumptuous endeavor (Genesis 11:7).

Even among the Maidu Indians of California, we find a legend that, during a funeral ceremony, the people “suddenly began speaking in different languages.” This account might not align perfectly with the biblical narrative, but the sudden diversification of languages remains a common theme.

Such remarkable parallels suggest, as Dr. Ernst Böklen contends, “the greatest likelihood exists that Genesis 11 and related tales stemming from other peoples are based on actual historical recollections.” These stories from diverse cultures, passed down through generations, appear to validate the universal experiences of humanity as recounted in the book of Genesis.

Rather than undermining the Bible’s credibility, these legends corroborate its account, testifying to shared human experiences that were profound enough to embed themselves into the collective memory of disparate peoples. Hence, rather than dismissing these tales as mere fables or myths, they should be seen as indirect evidence supporting the Bible’s narratives. By providing cultural contexts that mirror biblical events, these legends serve to underscore the universal truths found within the Scriptures.

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).