THE COLLEGE OF MAASIN FB: The College of Maasin

Website: www.cm.edu.ph
“Nisi Dominus Frustra”
Email: dulceprose.07@gmail.com
Maasin City
Contact No: 09201294975

BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION IN PHILIPPINE CONTEXT

COURSE ORIENTATION
I. Course Content Guide in Biblical Interpretation in Philippine Context
II. Course Overview
This course intends to pursue the vision and mission of the school in molding and shaping
students into intellectually competent with Christian values by defining their
understanding the Bible and Interpreting the Biblical text as the living witness of God’s
revelation to humanity. Also, it gives students an opportunity to discover the liberating
act of God in the person of Jesus Christ who is truly human and divine to bring the
Kingdom of God here and now. It also deals on the basic assumptions of Christianity in
Philippine context.

III. Course Contents Schedule from August 24 - December 17

ASSESSMENT
WEEK TOPIC DUE DATE
TASKS
Week 1 &2 Discussion of the Course Syllabus
Pretest August 20
Introduction : Getting Acquinted
with the Bible as Filipinos/
Approaches and
Reading/interpreting the text
Week 3 Formulate learning Sept 7
(8/29- Knowing the Context of a Particular Text interpretation
5Sept) & Approaches in Biblical Interpretation based on their
understanding
Week 4 Theological Approach in Interpretation: Submitted a September 12
(8/31-5 Creation Story & Land ( Gen 1-2) for reflection/ paper
Sept. Indigenous Peoples work
Week 5 (9/7 - Contextual Interpretation of the Tower of Drawn insights on its September 19
9/12) Babel ( Genesis 11:1-9) in Philippine Setting group assignment
reports

LIBERAL ARTS AND

EDUCATION
 Week 6
9/14-18 Figurative Interpretation of the Kingdom of God Drawn insights on Sept 26
the meaning of the
Kingdom of God
Week 7 Submit a Religious Oct 3
Sept. 22-25 Literal /literary form of Biblical Text Song Interpretation/
Oral Singing
Week 8 Analysis of women Oct 10
(Sept28-Oct 2) Women in the Bible & Filipino Women situation in the Bible
& Contemporary
Situation

Week 8 &10 Group Reports & Oct. 17

The Popular Filipino Christ & Christianity
( Oct 5- 23) Sharing of full
as a Living Faith Grasp of Filipino
traditional Christ &
practice of Christianity
Week 11 & 12
The World into Which Jesus Came & Philippine
(Oct 26-Nov.6 Submitted analytical Oct. 27
Situation
situation of Palestine
& Philippine Society
Week 13-15 Comparative Studies
Jesus Religious Background/Jesus and other
( Nov. 9-27 of Dec 5
world Faith
Jesus teachings &
other world faith
paper work
Week 16 Group reports Dec.12
Jesus Begins His Public Ministry
Nov. 30-Dec 5
Week 17 &18 Focus on Final Project/
Dec, 7-12

MODULE 4 :
Contextual Interpretation of the Tower of Babel ( Genesis 11:1-9) in Philippine Setting

Learning Outcomes:
• Formulate learning contextual interpretation of the text based on their understanding
● Drawing insights on how to interpret the Tower of Babel
● Have compare in Interpreting the Tower of Babel to Philippine Setting

INTRODUCTION
The Tower of Babel was built by the descendants of Noah to prevent the people from scattering.
This was done in defiance of God's commandment. The Tower symbolized their own efforts to settle
a land rather than to fill the earth as was God's command.

Brent A. Strawn
The Tower of Babel story (Genesis 11:1–9) is among the most famous in the Bible. It might even be considered an iconic text—

famous beyond its actual content; since the story was originally written it has come to mean much more than its actual words.
Although many Westerners have a vague idea of what the story is about, or at least know the name “Babel,” it is best to (re)read the

text in full. Here it is in the New Revised Standard Version:

1
Now the whole earth had one language and the same words. 2And as they migrated from the east, they came upon a plain in the land

of Shinar and settled there. 3And they said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks, and burn them thoroughly.” And they had brick

for stone, and bitumen for mortar. 4Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, and a tower with its top in the heavens, and let

us make a name for ourselves; otherwise we shall be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth.” 5The LORD came down to

see the city and the tower, which mortals had built. 6And the LORD said, “Look, they are one people, and they have all one language;

and this is only the beginning of what they will do; nothing that they propose to do will now be impossible for them. 7Come, let us go

down, and confuse their language there, so that they will not understand one another's speech.” 8So the LORD scattered them abroad

from there over the face of all the earth, and they left off building the city. 9Therefore it was called Babel, because there the LORD

confused the language of all the earth; and from there the LORD scattered them abroad over the face of all the earth.

Engage Brainstorming:

⮚ Why Build A Tower?

⮚ WHAT IS THE THEME OF THE TOWER OF BABEL?

⮚ HOW ARE WE GOING TO RELATE THIS TO PHILIPPINE CONTEXT/SETTING?

Why was God against the Tower of Babel?

Explore According to Genesis, the Babylonians wanted to make a name for themselves by
building a mighty city and a tower “with its top in the heavens.” God disrupted the
work by so confusing the language of the workers that they could no longer
understand one another.

Explain Topic :
Contextual Interpretation of the Tower of Babel (Genesis 11:1-9) in
Philippine Setting and even to Global setting

Globalization is much like the biblical Tower of Babel. The construction of a global
economy has begun. Some are for it. Some are against it. Neither group knows
exactly what "it'' is.

This economic Tower of Babel is being built without a set of construction plans. The
necessary architectural drawings aren't even in the process of being drafted.
Governments aren't thinking about the appropriate designs, since the tower is being
privately built.

In fact, national governments would rather not think about globalization because it
diminishes their role and their powers to control economic events.

The actual builders — private firms that are moving their economic activities around
the world — don't think about the design and construction of the global economy, since
each is small relative to what is being built.

For those who are true believers in the efficiency of private markets, there is no need
to think about the institutions and rules of globalization. Whatever is necessary will
simply evolve in the marketplace — without private thought or government action.

Markets will automatically set the necessary construction standards. As in the biblical
Tower of Babel, those involved in constructing the global economy are speaking many
different languages.

Globalization means many different things to many different people. Arguments for
and against it are often self-contradictory.

Perhaps these different languages and the associated disputes will stop a global
economy from being built — just as they stopped the biblical tower design to go to
heaven from being built.

If so, is that a good thing or a bad thing? Have we prevented ourselves from getting to
an economic heaven? Or have we prevented ourselves from over- reaching, trying to
play God — and ending up in what will surely be an economic hell?

Anxieties are high. The violent anti-globalization demonstrations that have occurred at
both public (WTO, IMF, World Bank, Seattle, Goteborg, Bologna) and private (Davos)
global meetings in the last few years have delivered that message.

Although the number of actual demonstrators is few, I suspect that if tomorrow, every
newspaper in the world were to have the headline "Globalization Ends," far more than
half of humanity would feel relieved.

In global public opinion surveys, less than 20% of the population thinks the world is
doing well.

The Tower of Babel and Financial Recession

Posted on May 22, 2018 by vigiliustc
In 1797 in Ditherington, England a local Flax Mill became the tallest building in the world.
That very same year, an economic crisis enraged in Great Britain and USA. Much business in
that countries experienced a significant downturn.

In 1870 the Equitable Life Building in New York City was inaugurated and got the status of the
tallest building in the world. Three years after that the panic of 1873 happened and lasted for
six years.

The New York World Tower shattered the record for the world’s tallest building in 1890, and
the Baring Crisis happened.

The Philadelphia’s City Hall held the status of tallest building in the world in 1893. Just in time
for the panic of 1893. A severe crisis that the US Treasury Department had to be bailed out.

The Metropolitan Life Tower broke the record for the world’s tallest building when it was
completed in 1907. The very same year the panic of 1907 broke out. The panic that led to the
creation of Federal Reserve.

Just before The Great Depression happened, simultaneous construction competes to hold the

status of the tallest building in the world. Including Chrysler Building, 40 Wall Street (a.k.a.
Trump Building), and The Empire State Building.

In the 1970s The World Trade Center and Chicago’s Sears Tower are constructed, both became
the world’s tallest building. Preceded by the OPEC oil price shock in 1973 that caused banking
crisis and economic stagflation.

Malaysia’s Twin Tower, Petronas Tower was completed in 1998 and held the status of tallest
building in the world. Right before the Asian financial crisis spread to the region.

The construction of Taipei 101 Tower began just months before the dot-com bubble burst.

Moreover, the Burj Khalifa in Dubai become world’s tallest building on 1st September 2008.
Just two weeks before Lehman Brothers went bankrupt and the Global Financial crush many
nations.

This correlation inevitably happened for reasons. A tall building needs vast amounts of
funding, that can only be obtained in the optimistic economy.

Hubris is abundant in a bullish market when the market is irrationally optimistic. Ambitious
projects often accompany it, the construction of the tall building is one of the examples.

Philippine Setting

The leaning Tower of

Babel
Corporate Watch
By Amelia HC Ylagan

The Cyber Libel Law, or formally, the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012,
has caused more confusion than the clarification it should have given the
libel laws of the Philippines through their evolution and refinement since the
Revised Penal Code was enacted in the 1930s. The chaos is most pathetic
in this restrictive time of the coronavirus pandemic, when limited human
communication and interaction has forced people’s concentration on the
internet — now the most convenient, and at times the only, means of talking
to the outside world from imposed isolation.

The allegory of the Biblical Tower of Babel comes forth in this confusing time.
The chilling lesson of human pride building its hierarchic ziggurat of layered
reputations for one to reach Heaven first, by whatever means including
stepping on others’ shoulders, can be seen as parallel to the quarrels of libel
and slander in our modern times. “Come, let us build ourselves a city and a
tower with its top in the sky, and so make a name for ourselves; otherwise
we shall be scattered all over the earth,” the descendants of Noah said
(Genesis 11:4). They had gone down from the Ark as it was beached on the
mountain after the Great Flood receded, and went from the East (figuratively
the Garden of Eden) towards the West (Babylonia), symbolic of degeneration
from the cleansed state (after the Flood) to mundane temptations from the
exercise of free will and individual differentiation and competition. It was
about pride and reputation.

In the beginning “The whole world had the same language and the same
words,” it is said in Genesis 11:1. But in the 18 years (estimated by some
Bible historians) building the Tower of Babel with its many rooms (like a high
rise condominium), quarrels started among the descendants of Noah, much
like the story of George Orwell’s Animal Farm, where organization and
administration schematics were being drawn for that aimed-for perfection in
governance, but thwarted by individual selfishness.

ADVERTISEMENT

God saw that they were bickering and maligning each other, and in His
omniscience saw that their hearts were stricken with the sin of Pride — they
wanted to be God — may the best man win. “So the Lord scattered them
from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. That is why it
was called Babel, because there the Lord confused the speech of all the
world. (Genesis 11:8-9).

The curse of the Tower of Babel is what drives defamation laws of the world,
to protect persons and their reputations from libelous or slanderous
declarations of others. Juxtaposed are the freedoms of speech and of the
press — basic human rights in democratic societies, drawing from the
philosophical free will and intellect that direct life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness — from the break-out of the forced colonization of the Great
Flood, when the Tower of Babel toppled and spilled the multi-lingual peoples
of the new world. Different views ensued, resolved by ubiquitous politics.

There is always something that suffers in the translation, many have said
only too often. And yet miscommunication can be an honest mistake, but a
lie cannot ever be pardoned or easier forgotten for its affront to its recipient,
be it an individual or to the public. The laws of defamation ask for motivation
for the identifiable offense (publication, or at least 3rd person witness), and
that is hard to establish by the affronted, and illogical for the libeler or
slanderer to admit to. For this reason, many countries (like the US) have
reduced libel to civil cases (guilt by a preponderance of evidence) from the
earlier category of criminal cases or sins against the state/people
establishing guilt by proof beyond reasonable doubt. In the Philippines, Libel
is still a criminal case, although that may be good or bad depending on which
side you are on — it is difficult to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the
alleged defamation was motivated to defame, with no basis, or an outright
lie. For the alleged libeler, “Truth is my defense,” but truth has to be proven
with sources and evidence beyond reasonable doubt.

In newspapers and other media, the intrinsic element of publication

constituting libel is most potentially incriminating. The journalistic What,
When. Where, Why and How must be answered by the article, supported by
evidence (it is actually occurring, or witnessed personally). So easily, “Truth
is my defense,” the reporter can say. But of course “slant” can be suspected
of the journalist — who can choose what elements of the story to emphasize,
and details to omit or not tie up with an unspoken but implied conclusion.
Biases, even subconscious preferences, especially on the higher level of
values and personal principles cannot be avoided, though straight journalism
must by professional ethics be objective and show both sides of an issue, if
there is one, built into the story. Investigative journalism must have the
integrity of truth.

For opinion writers/live media hosts, opinion which is slanderous, outright

libelous or in any way defamatory is his/her own lookout, as the network or
station always declares such opinion as separate and distinct to the
writer/speaker and not shared by the company or its other employees and
contractors. Freedom of speech and of the press is raised high with closed
fists, and often closed minds in this area. Proceed at your own risk with libel
and the law.

At the webinar “Libel and the Law” last week, motivations, two sides to an
issue, proof beyond reasonable doubt, and difficulties with libel laws were
discussed alongside technicalities of the law like the overriding prescriptive
period within which to file libel cases. The audience was the restricted and
isolated masses in coronavirus modified community quarantine, assumed to
be already over-saturated with related news on the issues of the Cybercrime
Prevention Law, the ABS-CBN franchise revocation, the warrantless arrests
of the Anti-Terrorist Act, amidst updates on the rising numbers of COVID-19
contamination, deaths, and recoveries. The webinar focused on the technical
incongruences of the decision of Judge Rainelda Estacio-Montesa, who
convicted Rappler CEO Maria Ressa and former Rappler researcher
Reynaldo Santos, Jr. for cyber libel committed in 2014 on Wilfredo Keng, a
businessman and the private complainant, who was reportedly under
surveillance for human trafficking and drug smuggling in 2012.

“The (Cyber Crime) Law should be stabilizing, but it is now the cause of
dissention,” said lawyer Geronimo Sy, main speaker at the webinar. He
pointed out that the CyberCrime Prevention Act started in 2008 with
discussions on spam and other internet fraud, and lay quite dormant in
Congress until 2012 when legislators decided hurriedly “to include at the last
minute cyber libel, because (some) legislators were being pilloried in the
media” at that time. Related law is the Bayanihan Act of 2020, which deals
with “Fake News,” mostly on social media, also hastily put together by our
legislators, Mr. Sy said. He stressed that “libel laws should once and for all
be re-hashed and consolidated.” His parting words were, “Fair criticism
should be OK and the higher an official goes, the official should be able to
take it. Legislators are not able to account for bad laws.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Retired Supreme Court Senior Justice Antonio T. Carpio, a panelist at the

“Libel and the Law” webinar, emphasized two points: First, the 12-year
prescription period is the “overriding issue in the Rappler case.” Cyber libel is
not a new case but the same as a traditional libel case with merely a new
medium/method (the computer, internet). The one-year prescriptive period
for filing holds for cyber libel as it has for all libel cases since the Revised
Penal Code of 1932 to now. The disputed Rappler article was published May
2012, which means complainant Wilfredo Keng had the right to sue only until
May 2013. After Rappler corrected a typo in the story in February 2014,
Keng then had the chance to sue until February 2015 (Rappler, June 16,
2020).

Justice Carpio’s second point, the elusiveness of social media and the
internet: what of online newspapers and postings, when authors are
sometimes anonymous or use aliases? The editors/publishers should verify
news or claims and declarations — ultimately, the editors/publishers are
liable. And finally, on the burden of proof in a libel case: in the libel of a
private person, the burden of proof is on the libeler; in the libel of a public
person, the burden of proof is on the public person.

Marites Vitug, veteran journalist and co-founder of Newsbreak magazine,

and panelist at the same webinar, took up from Justice Carpio’s last
statement on the public accountability of government officials. She had libel
cases filed against her by at least five public persons in the terms of three
presidents: Corazon Aquino, Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and Benigno Simeon
Aquino III. Some are under arbitration, some still ongoing.

The allegory of the Tower of Babel persists in today’s quarrels for standing
and reputation. The Tower leans, and again threatens to keel. Why do laws
have to be so politicized?

Amelia H. C. Ylagan is a Doctor of Business Administration from the

University of the Philippines.

ahcylagan@yahoo.com
POSSIBLE APPROACHES IN THE STUDY OF THE BIBLE

Three interconnected and generalized approaches:

1. Textual-literary approach consider whether the text contains some literary devices or
Images that serve a particular purpose or function or intention. Here, the material may
be viewed according to literary device used e.g. metaphor or simile, or hyperbole, etc.
Ex. Poetic materials such as the Hymns of Praise, Prophetic oracles, Proverbs, poetic
Prose, fables, myth (creation stories in Genesis)

2. Historical- sociological approach make use of the text as a basic source for
the reconstruction and evaluation of the history and society of Israel in Biblical times.
They come actually in the form of history-like stories or narratives. The intention of
Authors were to used these materials as a resource for the faith and life of the people
In its own time.

3. The theological- confessional approach make use of the text as sources of the basic creeds
and confession of faith of ancient Israel. In this approach such materials are seen as the
People of Israel’s testimonies about God as well as their interpretations of their faith in this
God. In a way that this approach may focus on the examination of the faith and religious
convictions of Israel as seen through her literature.
This approach also considers the Israelite writers’ perceptions and interpretations of the
meaning of their covenant relationship with God which had gone through several critical
Moments of testing as well as reinterpretation through several periods in their
history
 EXERCISES:

ASSIGNMENT:
Make an analyzes of the story of the Tower of Babel.
Guide questions:

1. What was the economic situation of the society at the time when the Tower of Babel was built?
2. Why God curse the Tower of Babel?
3. Can we say that the story is also happening in our society today? Explain

Make a summary of your own opinion about

the story of the Tower of Babel

One WORD to describe the story of the

Tower of Babel. Explain