Literal reading of Genesis will always get you in trouble - the text has been compiled from pre-existing cultures and was put in written form after centuries of oral tradition. The fragmentation of the text accounts for much of the inconsistencies in it.
The story of the tower and city of Babel seems to be somewhat out of place in the position that it has been placed.
Genesis is composed of several oral traditions that have been woven together and the fragments of the different stories that have survived don’t quite link up properly. I believe that the story in Genesis 11 would ‘read’ better if it was placed somewhere prior to the beginning of Genesis 5.
I think that this fragment of oral tradition has been misplaced in the written order when the Old Testament was eventually put into written form. Genesis 11:1-9 appears to ‘not fit’ when you read the context around it. It has been placed in the middle of a genealogical record that addresses the generations that arose after the flood of Noah.
In the passages that precede Genesis 11, it is evident that different tribes of men already had different languages. And, it is also apparent that these tribes are already ‘scattered’. Genesis 10:20 says:
These are the sons of Ham, after their families, after their tongues, in their countries and in their nations.
The story of Babel in Genesis 11 predates the story of Nimrod in Genesis 10.
Genesis 10:10 says this about Nimrod:
And the beginnings of his kingdom was Babel, and Erech, and Accad, And Calneh, in the land of Shinar.
The text reads such that Nimrod’s kingdom was established after Babel was named. Babel did not exist prior to the story told in Genesis 11 – it came about after the Lords scattered ‘the people’ abroad after confounding the language. Genesis 11:9 says:
Therefore is the name of it called Babel…
And, the other interesting thing about Genesis 11 is that it is one of the places in the Old Testament that the Lord is referred to in the plural. Verse 7 says:
Go to, let us go down and there confound their language…
Which is another reason why I think that this passage belongs to the same larger oral creation myth that Genesis 1:26 comes from:
And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness…
The form of Genesis 11, from verse 1 to verse 9, is quite beautiful and melodious – it uses recurring expression and structure – it is very poetic. The repetition of words is what keeps the text flowing. (I use the King James version….I love the unicorns in it…
)
Take the first few words from each stanza…:
"And the whole earth…
"And it came to pass…
"And they said…
"And they said…
"And the Lord came down…
"And the Lord said…
Etc….
The meaning is quite specific in the text that falls within the proscribed structure. Therefore, when the text says "the whole earth", I think it really does mean – the whole earth. The first verse does not say ‘children of men’ like verse 5 does. It says ‘the whole earth’. It was ‘the children of men’ who did the building of the city and tower. When the text refers to ‘people’, I believe it is referring to all beings who lived on the earth…’people’ would mean animal people, bird people, fish people, plant people….
I think that this story is referring to a time in the world’s mythic past when people believed that communication was possible between all living things. Many cultures around the world have origin myths that refer to a past in which men and animals were able to communicate with each other. Therefore, the phrase ‘the whole earth’ means just that – communication between all living things –plants included.
The Lords’ conclusion that: "…and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do" is quite intriguing.
What I try to understand is why the unification, through language and speech, of all living things – animals, plants, and the ‘children of men’ – would pose such a serious threat to the ‘Lords’.
Did all those other living things have knowledge that the Lords didn’t want the children of men to have? Why would that unbroken communication be something that needed to be changed? What would our world be like if we, as humans/children of men, could communicate freely and abundantly with the rest of the ‘people’ – the animals, birds, fish and even plants? What would they tell us? What could the ‘whole earth’ tell us about our existence here, where we came from, and where we are going? What secrets could the birds tell us? What do the animals know that we don’t?
And…who are the Lords? What kind of beings are they?