The story of the Tower of Babel reveals a profound truth: God values diverse solidarity over uniform solidarity. The scattering at Babel creates nations, cultures, and languages. In the biblical worldview, unity does not require erasing diversity; rather, true unity is found when diverse peoples are reconciled to God and to one another. This is the beautiful vision of Revelation 7:9, where people from “every nation, tribe, people, and language” stand together before the throne. The climax of the Babel story comes at Pentecost (Acts 2), where the Holy Spirit enables people who speak different languages to understand the gospel clearly, reversing the curse without abolishing the diversity.
The true solidarity of Christianity is well-articulated in John 14:15-21: truth knows no boundaries. God did not scatter to destroy unity permanently, but to eventually gather a redeemed and righteous unity—one that worships Him, being at one with Him rather than in human pride. The language confusion at Babel does not indicate that God opposes unity. It indicates that God opposes unity that excludes Him, defies His commands, and seeks to make humanity the center of its own universe. God scatters human pride so that He might one day gather human hearts in genuine, worshipful solidarity.
The Human Craving for Belonging
Humanity aims at belonging to some group but naturally prefers to be identified with the like-minded. A person feels comfortable identifying with those of their own language, race, or culture. This sense of belonging, while natural, provides fertile ground for racial or cultural divisions. In less developed countries, tribalism can tear a nation apart. Nothing appears sinister about this at first, because humanity inherently craves belonging to some grouping. Racial tensions are a product of solidarities structured from social preferences.
Consider the magnitude of the war currently prevailing in Ukraine. There was a time when Russia and Ukraine were in solidarity. An analytical assessment suggests the war was triggered by Ukraine’s desire to relate to Western nations. This triggered hidden animosity between Russia and Western nations, emanating from unresolved historical tensions. Even as Russia discarded communism, which was unacceptable to Western nations, one would have assumed such tensions would dissolve.
But communism was not the only cause of that tension. Civilized as those nations appear to be, one assumes that communication would easily resolve such conflicts. However, the problem with humanity is that it carries an ego, impossible to confront without humility. Solidarity with like-minded groupings, rather than appearing to succumb to strangers, creates tension. The sin of Ukraine was seeking solidarity with NATO, an alliance considered unfriendly to Russia, despite sharing a neighborhood with it. Why was it difficult to engage in communication with Russia if NATO is intended for peace?
Russia is considered despotic for not subscribing to Western democracies, and yet Russia is suspicious of Western democracies, which offer no guarantee of stability. The Western nations would be happy to see Russia, viewed as dictatorial, crumbling. But what makes it so difficult to engage Russia in communication, aiming at producing workable solutions? Differences leading to stupendous conflicts can be as significant as tribal divisions or as trivial as supporting rival football clubs. One feels threatened when existing among social rivals, and it is often difficult to deduce which group to blame when violence breaks out.
The Critical Skill of Confrontation
None of these groups necessarily deserves blame, as their preferences are based on tastes. Someone may even feel uncomfortable associating with disabled people, while others may prefer it. There is an aspect of confronting, the significance of which humanity remains largely unaware. It should not be a question of why we prefer what others do not prefer, but how we confront whatever preference we hold. Happiness lies in the ability to confront any condition and any situation. This is why children settle faster than adults after migrating to a strange environment—a possible reason Jesus suggested adopting children’s attitudes to be eligible for God’s Kingdom.
Let us use the term “confront” not to suggest fighting, but engaging in objective communication. Without the ability to confront, adults have a real challenge settling into a new environment. This starts with mastering the language and cultural dictates. The faster one learns to appreciate these, the faster one becomes happier, even in what one considers a strange environment. Unhappy people are those unwilling to confront. The aspect of confronting requires dealing with whatever makes one uncomfortable. The good reason for confronting anyone or anything is when such a thing or person causes problems or poses harm to humanity.
Perhaps the most serious social conflict among many people is homosexuality. What I have always found strange is that it is mostly those calling themselves “Christians” who have the most difficulty tolerating such people. If truly a Christian believer, one would certainly be aware of treating others as one desires to be treated (Matthew 7:12). The aspect of confronting includes understanding these individuals without condemning them.
Without God’s Spirit, understanding them may be a challenge. But with the aspect of confronting, one may actually engage in study to first appreciate the causes of homosexuality. This is different from sermonizing, using Old Testament Scriptural references, and presuming to be more righteous than them. Christianity is not about converting other people to one’s own likeness; it is about helping others appreciate being Christ-like. It remains Christ’s prerogative whether to change a person’s condition or not.
It cannot be the role of Christian believers to alienate others who also claim to be believers. Nowhere in the Christian Bible did Jesus say such people should be avoided or condemned. Whoever condemns such people identifies with what Paul described as being “babies in Christianity” (1 Corinthians 3:1-4; 1:10-17). They are yet to be grounded in Christian faith. Confronting is not an issue for those willing to address problematic issues in life. A true Christian is not limited by anything in this world, as able to even cast out demons in Jesus’ name (Mark 16:17).
The Christian’s Unique Ability to Confront
When unable to confront situations in this world, one might not yet be grounded in the Christian faith. Otherwise, a believer is able to confront anything, with the intention of removing error or whatever is evil. Jesus said that with faith as little as a mustard seed, Christians would not be limited in any way. This world is entangled in matters of desiring solidarity before loving common people. This ought to be understandable to Christians, equipped with the role of being the salt and the light of the world. What makes a true Christian different is the ability to confront.
“Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting people’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation. We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God. God made him who had no sin to be sin for us so that in him we might become the righteousness of God.” (2 Corinthians 5:17-21 NIV).
True Christianity suggests true solidarity, sustained by the spirit of treating others as one would like to be treated. Sadly, it is within Christianity that deep-seated divisions are often found. The reason is not difficult to find: Christianity carries an element of freedom, so anyone is free to worship according to what makes them feel comfortable. However, anything that makes one comfortable causes them to avoid confronting what is uncomfortable. The Jews were uncomfortable with the teachings of Jesus, but Jesus was comfortable associating with them, even to the point of being crucified.
The inability to look another person directly in the eye reflects an inability to confront. Interestingly, those failing to make eye contact with other people cannot confront. Such people become emotionally charged when facing situations they disagree with, assuming problems are solved by avoiding those they disagree with. However, avoiding problems cannot be the way to solve them. Equipped with the ministry of reconciliation, A Christian is expected to confront anything, including demons.
One way to prove that the doctrine of the Trinity is bogus is the unwillingness of its proponents to confront those opposed to it. I am yet to find a Trinitarian scholar who is willing to confront this subject convincingly, except by hiding behind scholastic jargon. A true Christian cannot avoid, or be unable to confront, anything. A person who is unable to directly look at another person—eyeball to eyeball—would be hiding something. Without anything to hide, there is no reason to dodge questions, even from the most hostile people.
Some Christians are unable to tolerate Jehovah’s Witnesses, for instance. It often turns out that these people are failing to handle the Scriptures put forward by Jehovah’s Witnesses. They, therefore, opt to make Jehovah’s Witnesses wrong, thereby feeling comfortable without them. That is typical of most denominational Christians, unable to confront Scripture. But one can’t be a believer when unable to confront (1 Peter 3:15). Such people become intimidated when tested scripturally, seeking to avoid Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Truth, Humility, and the Refusal to Confront
Interestingly, if one is truly grounded in Scripture, there can be no reason to avoid anyone, whether Jehovah’s Witness or any other. Only those not grounded in Scripture seek to avoid tough questions. Truth has nothing to do with dogmatic posturing. A truthful person behaves like the Bereans. The standard should always be Jesus. The other person may be correct, after all. Why should that make a believer uncomfortable? Shouldn’t the new revelation be treated as granting an opportunity to thank God for revealing the truth?
When unable to confront the truth, one has yet to be converted. Christianity is defined by a willingness to learn and change when proven wrong. Such are people who Jesus said are “poor in spirit” (Matthew 5:3). Those avoiding challenges are scared of disturbing their solidarity with the group they belong to. Rather than show the new understanding to their group, they feel intimidated. That aspect of failure to confront is inward-looking, common in humanity that prioritizes self-defense more than defending the person considered to be an opponent. The person then chooses to avoid the truth, possibly unaware that they are displaying the cowardice the Bible teaches against.
“This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the Day of Judgment: In this world, we are like Jesus. There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.” (1 John 4:17-18 NIV)
The biggest tragedy with humanity is always making the other person wrong and oneself right. James suggests being quick to listen and slow to speak (James 1:19). This does not necessarily mean information from another source would always be treated as true. But there is a difference between discarding errors from an informed source and rejecting information ignorantly. When helped to discard error, solidarity becomes possible. There is nothing to lose after being shown the error, except growing in grace.
“As soon as it was night, the believers sent Paul and Silas away to Berea. On arriving there, they went to the Jewish synagogue. Now the Berean Jews were of more noble character than those in Thessalonica, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true. As a result, many of them believed, as did also a number of prominent Greek women and many Greek men.” (Acts 17:10-12 NIV)
Solidarity is as dangerous as assuming that there is protection in a group, rather than in Christ Jesus. Christianity implies solidarity that is workable by abiding in Jesus, rather than in group solidarity. Denominationalism has caused a failure to individually examine the Scriptures, out of assuming there would be safety in solidarity. This is further complicated by hierarchical structures, where a leader is assumed to hold the position of Jesus and is actually worshipped by fellow believers.
Survival is Found in Confronting, Not Self-Defense
But when going by what Jesus taught, it becomes impossible to have such problems as characterized by denominational phenomena. Jesus remains the only model in dealing with matters of solidarity. God’s Kingdom is based on matters of survival, where Jesus is the only one to show the way. The rest of us are followers. Solidarity carries survival attributes when understood in the context of humility and willingness to be guided by Christ’s teachings.
The teachings of Jesus carry factors of survival, as opposed to anti-survival factors. Self-defense is an attribute that applies to physical humans. When Jesus rebuked Peter with, “Get behind me, Satan,” He revealed that the idea of self-defense is of the devil. That incident is a sufficient example from Jesus to help us understand that self-defense bears no Godly attribute.
“From that time on, Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, the chief priests, and the teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life. Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. ‘Never, Lord!’ he said. ‘This shall never happen to you!’ Jesus turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the concerns of God, but merely human concerns.’ Then Jesus said to his disciples, ‘Whoever wants to be my disciple must deny themselves and take up their cross and follow me.’” (Matthew 16:21-24 NIV)
This Scripture should be regarded as key to survival considerations. The rest of what Jesus taught stems from this particular truism. The implication suggests that it is wrong to protect oneself from danger. This can be confusing to those assuming that self-defense is natural for survival. But the ferocity with which Jesus rebuked Peter suggests that self-defense is the opposite of survival. Satan is the opponent of survival. Humanity is entrapped on a non-survival trajectory, which necessitated Jesus’ appearance for our redemption.
“For whoever wants to save their life will lose it, but whoever loses their life for me will find it. What good will it be for someone to gain the whole world, yet forfeit their soul? Or what can anyone give in exchange for their soul?” (Matthew 16:25-26 NIV)
To ordinary people, saving one’s life requires introversion. When a person pursues self-defense, he or she is pursuing the opposite of survival, according to Jesus. The satanic version of deception is that self-defense is necessary for survival, whereas Jesus teaches the opposite. It is a matter of who to believe: Jesus or Satan. The answer to that question reveals the true significance of survival. In short, the pursuit of survival can be viewed as obtainable either by defending or by confronting evil.
Confronting evil implies separating truth from error, aiming at quashing falsehood, while defending implies avoiding the truth. The greatest evil to confront is our physical nature, which is alienated from God. Human problems can be handled by confronting falsehood, intending to advance truthfulness, while the physical body feels uncomfortable. Jesus stated that only the truth sets humanity free. This is as workable as it is applicable in human conduct. The unhappy people are those unwilling to confront the truth.
The happiest people are those willing to confront anything as long as they maintain the idea of remaining truthful. This is just as the saying goes: “A man with a clean heart can never be hurt.” When feeling uncomfortable with confronting anything or anyone, it is because one has something to hide. Jesus was not in solidarity with the Jews, but He willingly accepted crucifixion, seeking to help them understand true solidarity with God, who created humanity in His image. Jesus is the only trusted vehicle towards that solidarity.
Andrew Masuku is the author of Dimensions of a New Civilisation, laying down standards for uplifting Zimbabwe from the current state of economic depression into a model for other nations worldwide. A decaying tree provides an opportunity for a blossoming sprout. Written from a Christian perspective, the book is a product of inspiration, relieving those who have witnessed the strings of unworkable solutions leading to the current economic and social decay. Most Zimbabweans should find the book to be a long-awaited providential oasis of hope, in a simple conversational tone.
The Print copy is now available at Amazon.com for $13.99
Also available as an e-copy at Lulu.com for $6.99