AN EXEGESIS ON HABAKKUK 2:1-4

Transcription

1 AN EXEGESIS ON HABAKKUK 2:1-4 CAMPBELL UNIVERSITY DIVINITY SCHOOL BUIES CREEK, NORTH CAROLINA APRIL 2009 BY JOEL M. USINA 2010 Joel M. Usina A King Messiah Fellowship Contribution kingmessiah.org

2 I will take my stand at my watchpost and station myself on the tower, and look out to see what he will say to me, and what I will answer concerning my complaint. And the LORD answered me: Write the vision; make it plain on tablets, so he may run who reads it. For still the vision awaits its appointed time; it hastens to the end--it will not lie. If it seems slow, wait for it; it will surely come; it will not delay. Behold, his soul is puffed up; it is not upright within him, but the righteous shall live by his faith. Habakkuk 2:1-4; ESV 1 How can the Creator of heaven and earth, YHWH Elohim who unilaterally entered into covenant with Abram [cf. Gen 15:9-17], who chose Israel to be his treasured possession [cf. Ex 19:5], who is the faithful God who keeps covenant and steadfast love with those who love him and keep his commandments [cf. Deut 7:9], whose throne is established on righteousness and justice [cf. Ps 97:2] idly look at traitors and [remain] silent when the wicked swallows up the man more righteous than he [Hab 1:13; emendation mine]? Habakkuk, in similar form as many who preceded and succeeded him, considered this apparent contradiction: YHWH is righteous and just, yet, this does not coincide with what happens on earth. Abraham, as he questions YHWH's method of judging Sodom and Gomorrah, declares to YHWH, Far be it from you to do such a thing, to put the righteous to death with the wicked, so that the righteous fare as the wicked! Far be that from you! Shall not the Judge of all the earth do what is just? [Gen. 18:25; emphasis mine]. Although the contexts of Abraham's and Habakkuk's inquiries differ, the question in focus is the same: Where is the justice of YHWH in the face of evil? 1 Unless otherwise noted, all Scripture will be quoted from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version (ESV), copyright 2007 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers, Wheaton, IL. 1

3 Even now, over two millennia later, theodicy is alive and relevant to humanity. Truly, as O'Brien states, this topic is timeless. 2 The pericope of this study possesses what Mark Seifrid calls the Apostle Paul's grounds for his gospel, 3 and what Rabbi Simlai describes in the Talmud as the most succinct summary of the ו צ דּ יק בּ א מוּנ תוֹ י ח י ה Torah; 4 [v e tsaddîq bě emŭnātô yĭch e yěh], The righteous shall live by his faith. Considering these statements, plus the relevance of theodicy, the task at hand is no light endeavor. Nevertheless, the potential yield of fruit is far too great to avoid such an effort, which will undoubtedly aim at contributing practical thoughts to what is considered a foundational piece of Scripture. CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS While approaching the book of Habakkuk, it will be informative to first see the varying time periods that scholars have placed the prophet within. Freedman mentions that the medieval kabbalistic commentary Sefer ha-zohar [c. AD 1300] identifies [Habakkuk] as the son of the Shunammite woman saved by the prophet Elisha [mid 9th century BC]. 5 Another early date, Freedman points out, is made by W. R. Betteridge, who puts Habakkuk in the time period of King Hezekiah [ BC]. 6 The wicked in 1:4 would then be a reference to the Assyrians who conquered northern Israel and came against Jerusalem [cf. 2 Kings 18-19]. Andersen provides a date from Karl Budde, who claimed that Habakkuk lived during the reign of 2 Julia O'Brien, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (Nashville: Abingdon, 2004), Mark A. Seifrid, Paul's Use of Habakkuk 2:4 in Romans 1:17: Reflections on Israel's Exile in Romans, in History and Exegesis: New Testament Essays in Honor of Dr. E. Earle Ellis for His 80th Birthday, ed. Sang-Won (Aaron) Son, (New York: T&T Clark, 2006), Soncino Talmud, Seder Nezekin, Tractate Makkoth, Folio 23b - 24a. 5 David Noel Freedman, The Anchor Bible Dictionary (New York: Doubleday, 1996), 3:2. 6 W. R. Betteridge, The Interpretation of the Prophecy of Habakkuk. (AJ 7: 1903), In Freedman, ibid. 2

4 Manasseh [ BC]. 7 Fohrer suggests that the text ought to be placed somewhere between 626 and 622 BC, based on the conclusion that the wicked in 1:4 are the Assyrians. 8 One of the latest dates is made by Torrey, who claimed that the conqueror is Alexander the Great, putting Habakkuk in the 4th century BC. 9 However, Roberts and Freedman both comment that most contemporary scholars place Habakkuk somewhere between the dates 612 and 587 BC. 10 Based on the range of these conclusions, it can be observed that settling on dates and details to describe the historical context surrounding Habakkuk is difficult. The three main reasons for this are: (1) the text does not provide the reader with a helpful superscription, like that of Zechariah, for example; (2) any reference to people[s] is somewhat ambiguous; and (3) there are no circumstances mentioned that speak clearly of a known event in history. However, despite lacking these helpful pieces, Habakkuk does contain certain grammatical and literary clues that aid in determining a likely context for the book. 11 The reference to the כּ שׂ דּ ים [kăś e dîm; Chaldeans ] in 1:6 is one of the most, if not the most insightful hints the text offers. 12 In 2 Kings 25, Nebuchadnezzar and the כּ שׂ דּ ים laid siege against Jerusalem [ BC]. Assyria had been the dominant empire in the region for well over a century, but when Nineveh was destroyed by the Babylonians in 612 BC, the Babylonian empire took a large leap toward its rise to power. Habakkuk 2:20 seems to allude to the temple still existing in Jerusalem, which would then place the text, or at least portions of it, sometime 7 Karl Budde, Habakkuk ZDMG NF 9 84:139-47, 1930, cited in Francis I. Andersen, Habakkuk. The Anchor Bible Vol. 25 (New York: Double Day, 2001), Georg Fohrer, Introduction to the Old Testament (Nashville: Abingdon, 1988), C. C. Torrey, The Prophecy of Habakkuk, in Jewish Studies in Memory of George A. Kohut, eds. S. Baron and A. Marx (New York. 1935), J. J. M. Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah: A Commentary (Louisville: Westminster John Knox, 1991), 83; Freedman, ibid. 11 Freedman, 3:3. 12 The Chaldeans are also known as the Babylonians. These are used interchangeably here. 3

5 before 587 BC. Therefore, based on what is recorded in 2 Kings and the description of these people provided by Habakkuk, it seems appropriate and accurate to place Habakkuk in and around the time of the rise of the Babylonians [c BC]. Examining the text further will reveal that the conversation between Habakkuk and YHWH seems to indicate a significant time lapse between certain sections. A compelling explanation for this can be deduced by zooming in on 1:5-6. Roberts suggests that in order for God's plan to be unbelievable [1:5], it must have been the case that the Chaldeans, at the time when this response [1:5-11] was given, were not a serious threat to Judah. 13 In order for this to have been the case, this portion of Habakkuk must have been given prior to the Babylonians defeating the Egyptians at Carchemish in 605 BC. With the Chaldean army on the Philistine coast after this battle, YHWH's plan would not have been hard to believe. The content in 1:14-17 and in 2:5-19 suggests that the author had been living for some time under the oppression of the Babylonians, which began around the turn of the century. 14 In other words, it would be the case that these latter sections were conversations that took place sometime between c. 604 and 587 BC. The following will provide a more descriptive background for the likely historical context of Habakkuk. In 609 BC, King Josiah was killed by Pharaoh Neco [cf. 2 Kings 23:29-30; 2 Chron 35:21-24]. Josiah's son, Jehoahaz, succeeded his father. After three short months, however, Neco dethroned Jehoahaz, deported him to Egypt, and placed Jehoahaz's brother, Jehoiakim, on the throne [cf. 2 Kings 23:31-35; 2 Chron 36:1-4]. From BC, King Jehoiakim and the residents of Judah were under the hand of the Egyptians. It is very probable that the first lament 13 Roberts, Ibid. 4

6 and oracle of Habakkuk [cf. Hab 1:2-11] was made and received some time during these years of Jehoiakim's reign. The atrocities Habakkuk speaks of in 1:3-4 could then be applied to the inhabitants of Judah and possibly to the Egyptian oppression [but not to the Assyrians, nor even the Chaldeans]. Habakkuk's reference to the torah being paralyzed and justice going forth perverted [1:4] suggests internal corruption, based on the demand of torah obedience being applied only to Israel. Sometime between 605 and 598 BC [likely soon after the battle of Carchemish], Jehoiakim and the kingdom of Judah were made a servant to Nebuchadnezzar [cf. 2 Kings 24:1]. Jehoiakim rebelled against the king and as a result, in 598 BC, Nebuchadnezzar campaigned against Judah, killed Jehoiakim, and placed Jehoiakim's son, Jehoiachin, on the throne [cf. 2 Kings 24:2-6]. However, in 597 BC, Nebuchadnezzar dethroned Jehoiachin and proceeded to deport the king and thousands of other Judean residents, including many from the upper class and military leaders, back to Babylon [cf. 2 Kings 24:10-17]. Nebuchadnezzar then placed Zedekiah on the throne as a vassal king. Zedekiah paid tribute to Babylon, but rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar in BC. Habakkuk 1:14-2:20 likely occurred sometime during the reign of Zedekiah [ BC]. Again, Habakkuk 2:20 mentions YHWH still in his temple; therefore, the temple must be standing at this point. As was mentioned earlier as well, 2 Kings 25 describes the destruction of the temple, and Jerusalem, by the hands of Nebuchadnezzar and the כּ שׂ דּ ים [kăś e dîm], which took place in 587 BC. It may be fitting then to attribute the prayer, or psalm, of Habakkuk in chapter 3 to a time period after the ruin of Jerusalem and second deportation of Judeans to Babylon. The temple being destroyed surely would have caused any prophet of YHWH to cry out, clinging to YHWH for salvation [3:17-19]. 5

7 In both the Jewish [Tanakh] and Christian canon, the book of Habakkuk can be found within what is commonly known as the Book of the Twelve. 15 Christian tradition labels this collection of books the Minor Prophets [ minor referring to their size, not importance]. The Christian canon places these books at the end of the Old Testament, whereas in the Tanakh, they can be found in the middle. Regardless of their placement, these books possess a wide range of prophetic material and informative descriptions of historical events. Also, they have been the source of hope for anticipatory events, and even, in part, have become evidence [proof-texts] for the messiah-ship of Jesus and the gospel his disciples proclaim(ed) [cf. Mic 4:5, Luke 1:17; Hos 11:1, Matt 2:15; Hab 2:4, Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11; Hos 1:10, 2:3, Rom 9:25-26]. O'Brien points out that the book of Habakkuk is autobiographical in nature. 16 She further comments that Habakkuk immediately speaks in the first person [1:2], and his own person is not obscured behind his role as God's messenger. 17 Habakkuk unabashedly opens himself up to YHWH and laments in response to what he observes happening on earth. Atypical of most other prophetic material, Habakkuk only directs his passion and despair to God himself, rather than at the king. 18 This may only indicate, however, that what is recorded from Habakkuk is only a piece of his entire prophetic ministry. It is likely that he did speak to the king on occasion and those encounters were not recorded. Habakkuk includes two superscriptions [1:1 and 3:1], which could act like dividers of the text. 19 There is a clear distinction between the material in 1:2-2:20 and 3:2-19. Within these two sections there are three main genres: (1) dialogue [containing laments] between Habakkuk and 15 These include Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. 16 O'Brien, Ibid. 18 David Prior, The Message of Joel, Micah, and Habakkuk: Listening to the Voice of God (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity, 1998), Freedman, ibid. 6

8 YHWH [1:1-2:6a], (2) woe oracles [2:6b-20], and (3) Habakkuk's prayer, or psalm [3:1-19]. 20 Andersen suggests these separate parts may indicate they have been written by different people. Although editorial emendations were likely made at a later date and the process of transmission may have affected some parts of the material, there is no need, however, to further suggest that what is recorded is actually from someone other than Habakkuk. This may be doubly true here, on the grounds that there is very little known about Habakkuk in the first place. 21 FORM, STRUCTURE, MOVEMENT Habakkuk 2:1-4 is found at the latter end of a conversation between YHWH and Habakkuk. After the superscription [1:1], Habakkuk cries out a lament to YHWH [1:2-4]. In 1:5-11, YHWH responds to Habakkuk's cry; but rather than assure Habakkuk the wicked were going to be destroyed right then [as was Habakkuk's likely preference], YHWH says the exact opposite. At some point, seemingly after a significant time lapse, Habakkuk cries out to YHWH again [1:12-13]. This time Habakkuk references YHWH's character, perhaps to re-assert his faith in the face of troubling, contradicting observations. Habakkuk then describes in further detail the godlessness and pride of the Chaldeans, or maybe just their king [1:14-17]. Chapter 2 begins with what seems like a later description of an internal thought Habakkuk had when he realized that he still needed an [adequate] answer to his question Where is the justice of YHWH? [cf. 1:13; 2:1]. The conversation stops here, leaving the rest of chapter 2 for YHWH's woe 20 Andersen, Cf. Andersen,

9 oracles. Chapter 3 is Habakkuk's psalm, which is apocalyptic in content and is comparable to Psalms 92-97, and 110. The beginning of YHWH's response in v. 2 is the imperative כּ תוֹב [k e tôb; write ], referring to the vision, followed by another imperative וּב א ר [ûbā ēr; (and) make plain ], referring to the content of the vision. In v. 3, YHWH seems to qualify the vision with an estimated time of arrival [ETA]. Unfortunately, however, the ETA is not very descriptive and hints to a considerable distant future. In the meantime, prior to the vision happening and/or being fulfilled, v. 4 seems to describe two options for how one can live in response to the vision. DETAILED ANALYSIS Upon my watch I will stand, and station myself upon the siegework; and I will watch to see what YHWH says in me, and what I will return concerning my reproof. 22 Similar to the beginning of the book, chapter 2 begins with Habakkuk's initiative. 23 This statement is in the first person and, as was mentioned earlier, seems to suggest that it was initially an internal thought written down later to describe what the prophet did to receive the vision from YHWH. 24 Furthermore, this [later] explanation could also have been an attempt to validate Habakkuk's prophetic ministry and/or the vision that he had received. Because a prophet was generally a part of the religious cultic institution, a validation may have been necessary due to the often contradicting messages of true and false prophets [cf. Jer 28; Hos 9:7-9; Mic 3:5; Zeph 3:5]. In other words, to be sure Habakkuk's vision would be heard and 22 Each verse [v. 1-4] in bold font provided here, and below, are the authors translation. 23 O'Brien, Andersen, 191. Andersen calls it a soliloquy. 8

10 received, he described his intent and actions as being consistent with true prophet form [cf. 2 Sam 18:24; 2 Kings 9:17; Is 21:8; 62:6]. Prior states, The role of the watchman in Israel was crucial. It was an essential ingredient of any prophet's ministry [cf. Hos 9:8]. 25 Similarly, Roberts says, This language [v. 1] probably derives from a widespread self-understanding of the prophet as a spiritual watchman for the people [cf. Is 21:8; Ezk 3:17-21]. 26 The picture of a prophet [watchman] standing, kneeling, and/or laying prostrate on the walls of Jerusalem, with the intent of hearing from YHWH, is the scene being portrayed here. This deliberate behavior displays one's intent to commune with the Creator; surely this must invoke his presence. The first part of this verse does not seem to cause much variation in translation. However, the latter part of this verse, similar to others in this pericope, has been disputed. It is interesting that most popular translations [i.e.,,, NIV, NRSV, ESV, KJV, NASB] render the preposition בּ י [bî] as to me, rather than in me, or from me, or even with me. If the text had ל י [lî] instead of י,בּ it could easily be translated to me. However, that is not the case. Therefore, the text may be suggesting that Habakkuk expected YHWH's answer to be personal, in the sense that the answer will come from within Habakkuk, as opposed to an audible voice or sign from outside him. It could also suggest that Habakkuk, like a good prophet, knew that he was going to be the one from whom YHWH's answer will come and/or be proclaimed to others through. This subtle difference does add dimension to the text. 25 Prior, Roberts,

11 Another difficult phrase is וּמ ה אָשׁ יב ע ל תּוֹכ ח תּ י [ŭmāh āshîv ǎl-tôkǎchtǐ] what [I? or he?] will return [concerning? or upon?] my reproof. 27 How should this be translated? There are considerable differences between the four choices [although only three would make sense]. The imperfect, first, common, singular form of the verb שׁוּב [shŭv; to return ] suggests that, since Habakkuk is speaking, the first choice would be I, not he, as in YHWH. Roberts suggests, however, that Habakkuk is waiting for YHWH's response to his reproof [1:12-13], so to translate this verb literally would be dubious. 28 Despite what one settles on for the verb, the second choice has potential to either describe Habakkuk receiving reproof from YHWH, or adding to his already-given reproof in 1: There is ample ground for either argument. On one hand, Habakkuk might expect to be reproved by YHWH for being carnal minded; therefore, he deliberately prepares for an appropriate response. This expected reproof, however, is unlikely to be a correction for doing something wrong, but rather a rebuttal of sorts. Doubtful Habakkuk crossed lines in speaking to YHWH [at least in this text]. On the other hand, Habakkuk could be planning to further provoke YHWH to act according to his justice, so, likewise, preparing for this response might be prudent. 29 Following Leclerc's observation that Habakkuk does play a role of intercessor, it would be expected that he would plead for YHWH to intervene and bring justice, which could take the form of provocation If one settles on the word upon, then it would mean something like when I am reproved. Also, these latter two options are not the only ones to choose from, but do convey the basic difference in suggested translations. 28 Ibid., This would assume watch carries the idea of preparing, or determining. 30 Thomas L. Leclerc. Introduction to the Prophets: Their Stories, Sayings, and Scrolls ( New York: Paulist Press, 2007), 232. Note as well, provoke here does not imply to instigate in the sense that Habakkuk has an ill intent behind his words; rather, provoke in the sense of referring to YHWH's character with the intent of getting him to respond according to it. 10

12 Even though both renderings could be argued, it seems more likely that Habakkuk is expecting to add to his already-given reproof. Not only does the verb form hint in this direction, but also taking into account that theodicy naturally contradicts sound logic, Habakkuk may still be in search for an [adequate] answer to the questions he asked YHWH earlier [1:3, 12-13]. This does not imply, nor necessitate, that the Divine is unable to answer sufficiently, but, rather would suggest that a human is often incapable of understanding adequately. And YHWH answered me saying, Write the vision and make it plain upon the tablets in order that he who reads may run with it. Similar to the above verse, the first portion of this sentence is not typically contested. Habakkuk recognizes that YHWH is responding to his complaint and describes what YHWH initially said. The vision has not been given, nor is it received in this verse, but, preparatory commands are provided in order to handle it correctly when it is given; write... and make it plain. The reason for these commands could have been two-fold: (1) So that people will have a source for guidance and reassurance, and (2) similar to Deut. 31:26, the vision could have been and/or still be a witness against the people who did or do not believe [cf. Is. 30:8-11]. 31 It is noteworthy to mention that there is no definite article [ [ה attached to ח זוֹן [chāzôn; (a) vision ], but one is attached to ה לּ חוֹת [hăllŭchôt; the tablets ]. Accordingly, this phrase could be rendered Write a vision upon the tablets. Andersen comments that ח זוֹן can be forced into a definite state based on this section not being in proper prose form. 32 Also, the article on should receive one ח זוֹן [hǎyyăyǐn; the wine (v.5a)] may be enough to suggest ה יּ י ן and ה לּ חוֹת 31 Roberts, Andersen,

13 too. 33 The context does not have any indicators that Habakkuk is free to write just any vision, but only the one YHWH reveals. This would cause this vision to be definite. This is important based on the fact that this vision contains YHWH's answer to Habakkuk's laments, both from 1:2 and especially 1: As far as the significance of tablets are concerned, Prior states, It was common in Habakkuk's time and place to erect tablets, probably of wood, in public places, so that notices of general interest and importance could be fixed to them [cf. Is 8:1-4; 30:7-8]. 34 Prior then comments that the tablets could be referring to the ones given at Mt. Sinai [cf. Ex 24:12; 31:18; Deut 4:13; 5:22; 9:9-11]. 35 The idea is the vision will be displayed in some public place for all to see and in some manner be connected to God's torah. This may not be too much of a stretch, based on YHWH's constant message to turn back to torah [e.g., 2 Kings 17; Ezk 18; Jer 6:16]. The description of the tablets make it seem like they are specific, familiar tablets being referred to, rather than random slabs of clay, stone, or wood. This could be nothing more than a reference to tablets Habakkuk may have had in his possession. The text does not provide enough evidence to support any one conclusion. The latter part of this verse poses difficulty in translating. This may easily be seen by the various translations of the Bible. Unfortunately, as a result of the difficulty, the meaning of the passage can differ significantly. Is the one who reads supposed to run with the vision? Or, is the one who runs supposed to be able to read the vision clearly? Following the Jewish Publication Society Bible [JPS]: Is the one who reads to read the vision swiftly? Similarly, the NET Bible 33 Ibid. 34 Prior, Ibid. 12

14 translates the passage as:...so the one who announces it may read it easily. 36 Heflin suggests that the Hebrew here clearly puts the emphasis on the running of the reader, not the reading of the runner. 37 He goes on to explain that It means that the person who reads the message will adopt it as a guide for living will run through life according to it. 38 The translation provided above follows this train of thought. The preposition בוֹ [bô; in/from/with it ] at the end of the sentence is often a trouble spot for translation. Roberts states: The construal of the suffixed preposition discussed above is probably the one that would occur to a reader first, but there is a slight grammatical problem with it. In all the examples cited [cf. Deut. 17:19; Jer. 36:8, 10, 13; Neh. 8:3, 18; 13:1 2 Chron. 34:18] it is the document [sêpher], not the contents [tôrâh] of the document, from which one reads. If the construction in Habakkuk followed that pattern, one would expect the masculine plural suffix on the preposition, since the document is designated as "tablets," a masculine plural noun. The only masculine singular antecedent for the suffix to refer to is the vision, the contents written on the tablets. This difficulty, as slight as it may be, 39.רוּץ but with the verb,קוֹר א not with the participle,בוֹ suggests that one try construing Based on this observation, Roberts offers a double meaning for this phrase. The first translation he provides is: Write the vision legibly on the tablets so that the one reading from it can read quickly. The other he suggests reads: Write the vision on the tablets and make its import plain so that the one reading it can take refuge in it. 40 Roberts bases this latter translation on similar word form found in Proverbs 18:10. The idea, he suggests, would be that the one who reads the vision can take refuge in it while awaiting its fulfillment. 41 Roberts 36 The NET Bible [InterNET,or New English Translation] can be found at 37 J. N. Boo Heflin, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1986), Ibid. 39 Roberts, Ibid. 41 Ibid. 13

15 claimed he is inclined to think that Habakkuk intentionally played with such a double meaning. 42 Andersen, Roberts, and Walvoord agree that the vision ought to be written plainly so the one who reads can do something with it [e.g., run with it, proclaim it as a herald, take refuge in it]. 43 Barker, on the other hand, holds that the vision is supposed to be written clearly so the one running can read it. 44 This latter conclusion, however, does not seem to fit the context, and even despite the context, possesses a quite senseless meaning. Habakkuk has asked YHWH to respond to all the injustices that he sees. Habakkuk has cried out for salvation [1:2] and has revealed his desire for YHWH to judge the wicked [1:12-13]. Therefore, YHWH, who does nothing without revealing his secret to his servants the prophets [cf. Amos 3:7] and who longs for his people to return to him [cf. Ezk 18:23-32], is more likely to insist his message is clearly communicated in order that the readers have ample opportunity to respond accordingly, rather than hoping one who is running by can read it clearly, or even suggesting one read it swiftly. Whether one who reads is supposed to run with it as a herald, or use it as a guide to live, or be able to take refuge in it, the gist is clear the vision is, in part, meant to provoke a response. For the vision is yet for the appointed time, and it will witness to the end, and it will not disappoint. If it lingers, wait for it; for it will surely come and won't be late. 42 Ibid, John F. Walvoord, Roy B. Zuck, and Dallas Theological Seminary, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1985), 1:1512. Roberts, 109. Andersen, Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, The New American Commentary. Vol. 20 (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001), 298. (electronic ed., Logos Library System) 14

16 As was mentioned earlier, YHWH seems to qualify the vision [that has yet to be given] with an estimated time of arrival. If one considers the greater context, it would seem pertinent that Habakkuk receive from YHWH some response in reference to when YHWH is going to act against the injustices on earth. Moreover, having been told when YHWH is going to intervene, despite the lack of precision, seems to be sufficient for Habakkuk evidenced by his words in 3: Therefore, it may be that this was really all Habakkuk needed to know: YHWH has heard your complaint and will take care of the problem, when it's the right time but, now is not that time. ק ץ [mô êd; appointed time ] and מוֹע ד Roberts mentions how the usage of the nouns [qēts; end ] gives the impression that this time [whenever it is] is fixed; it cannot be altered. 45 The word מוֹע ד comes from the verb י ע ד [yā ǎd; to fix, appoint, assemble ]. 46 It may then be appropriate to think of this time as having been written down in YHWH's Day-Timer. Furthermore, the prepositional prefix ל combined with the patach vowel [,[ל makes this a definite time מּוֹע ד] ;ל lămmô êd]. In other words, the vision will not happen at an appointed time, rather, the appointed time. Only nine other times is ל מּוֹע ד found in the Scriptures [cf. Gen 17:21; 18:14; 21:2; Josh 8:14; 1 Sam 9:24; 13:8; 2 Kings 4:16-17; Dan 11:29]. In each instance [except maybe Dan 11:29], the time/location/event appointed is not only fulfilled, but when it is set, the one making the appointment seems to have a premeditated, intentional reason for it [e.g., YHWH's promise to Abraham was going to be delivered, Ai's army went to battle against Israel, Samuel 45 Roberts, Ibid. 46 Francis Brown, S.R. Driver and A. Briggs (BDB), Hebrew and English Lexicon (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2006),

17 was supposed to eat with the guests]. There was no randomness or unexpectedness surrounding these set times and events that took place. 47 Based on these observations, it may be that when Habakkuk received this description from YHWH, he thought of YHWH's appointed feasts [cf. Lev 23; especially v. 1-2]. Prior to Israel entering Canaan under Joshua, YHWH gave them his torah, or instructions. Within these ;מוֹע ד [mô ă dîm; plural of מוֹע ד ים instructions, YHWH commanded his people to observe certain appointed times ; typically rendered appointed feasts, cf. Lev 23]. The initial description of these set times provides the reason for the aforementioned suggestion; namely, YHWH declares, These are the appointed times of YHWH. And again YHWH says, they are my appointed times [cf. v. 2; emphasis added]. YHWH's description gives the reader the impression that these times not only belong to him, but also that he is giving them to Israel for a reason. 48 The connection suggested here is that the appointed time for the vision may be referring to one of these set times of YHWH. Again, the definite article suggests specificity. It seems appropriate that one of these already-set times of YHWH, which Israel was/is to observe, may be the reference. Suggesting that Habakkuk thought the reference to the end was in referring to the eschaton would be anachronistic. Yes, it may be, in part, an allusion to this time, but here in this passage, it is highly doubtful Habakkuk, and even the readers, thought of it in the same way contemporary readers do. Habakkuk more likely had a more immediate frame of reference; 47 One could try and argue about the situation with Saul's premature sacrifice, and say that Samuel was late. However, the context puts Saul in the wrong, not Samuel. Saul, perhaps, was the kind of person who was presumptuous and whose soul was not upright. See below. 48 There are seven מוֹע ד ים given to Israel; Sabbath, Passover, Unleavened Bread, First Fruits, Pentecost, Trumpets, Day of Atonement, and Tabernacles. Due to biased presuppositions based on misinformation, these appointed times are often anachronistically called Jewish holidays. The text makes it clear they belong to YHWH they are his. The implications drawn from the timing of Jesus' death and resurrection, and also the descending of the Spirit in Acts 2 seem quite significant, and relative to the connections presented here. 16

18 specifically the end of the Babylonian oppression. In fact, the apocalyptic psalm in chapter 3 was probably initially proclaimed in reference to YHWH judging the wicked oppressors of that time, not necessarily the entire world, as on judgment day. With this said, however, there is a difference between what Habakkuk [and the original readers] thought, verses what all YHWH intended to communicate in passages such as this. In other words, just because in this context Habakkuk may not have associated the vision with the end of the world, does not mean that connection is invalid. Granted, hindsight is always 20/20. The thrust of the remainder of the verse seems clear; the vision is in reference to a future date, so be patient until it comes. What is not clear, however, is who or what is performing the verbs. Andersen suggests that the answer is an implied person. For instance, he renders the phrase ו ל א י כ זּ ב [v e l ō y e kăzzēb] as, he will not deceive. 49 In fact, all the third, masculine, singular verbs he renders as he instead of it. ; although, grammatically this may be a valid option, it does not seem to flow with the first phrase of the verse; it is the vision, not a person, that appears as the subject of the verbs. To suggest a person here personifies the vision, which is not necessary since it's not the vision itself that will do anything, but the one of whom the vision speaks YHWH. Moreover, as we will see, the content of the vision, which has yet to be given, is not just about a person(s), but also about judgment. In other words, there is likely a he within the content of the vision as Roberts suggests, but using he in this passage does not grasp the scope of its meaning as well as it. YHWH reassures Habakkuk that the content of the vision, which takes the form of a promise here, is sure to come about. YHWH has heard Habakkuk's cry and has made it known that he will respond as was requested. Contrary to Habakkuk's personal preference, however, 49 Andersen, 198,

19 YHWH will bring about the plan contained in the vision when it's the right time. Verse 4 explains the means of how one should live in this intermediate period. Behold the presumptuous, his soul is not upright within him. But a righteous one, by his faithfulness, will live. This verse not only presents great difficulty in translating, but more especially what may be the most significant contrast in practical understanding depending on how it is translated. For example, Andersen says that the righteous person will live by the trustworthiness of the vision, as opposed to his own א מוּנ ה [ ĕmûnāh; faithfulness ]. 50 The reverse gives the credit [for living] to the righteous person, not the vision [or even YHWH, as is implied by Andersen's translation]. Roberts' conclusion agrees with Andersen's, stating that the faithfulness of the vision will cause the righteous one to live. 51 If Andersen and Roberts are correct in connecting the א מוּנ ה to the vision [and even to YHWH], then the phrase would be redundant with v. 3, it no longer contrasts with the aforementioned person, and it alludes to a passivity on the part of a righteous one, all three of which would disagree with the immediate and larger context. Considering these varying translations, in an apparent attempt to reconcile both perspectives, Hobbins comments: However one interprets the particulars of 2:4b, the gist remains the same: the upright person, in the face of injustice and calamity, will live out his life on the basis of trust in the trustworthiness of the vision vouchsafed to the prophet, namely, that an end to the calamitous situation will come, and not delay Ibid., Roberts, John Hobbins, Habakkuk 2:4 from Ancient Hebrew Poetry, [accessed ] 18

20 Along these same lines, O'Brien says, When 2:4 is read as underscoring the faithfulness of the vision rather than of the individual, the theological import of the verse is not altered radically, in that it still stresses the trustworthiness of God. 53 The reason for these variations will be explored further below. Unlike the previous verses, all of v. 4 presents difficulty in translating. When initially approaching this verse, much debate and variations have come out of trying to locate the first verb ע פּ ל ה [ ǔpplāh]. One influence contributing to the specific word chosen above [i.e.,,, presumptuous ], is an apparent same-root verb found in Numbers 14: The Israelites refused to obey YHWH to fight the Canaanites in order take hold of the land that YHWH was giving them. After Moses declared they were to die in the wilderness because of their unbelief and disobedience, they rallied for war as if to now obey the original command with hopes of persuading YHWH to change his mind. Moses told them that YHWH was not going to fight with them if they went to battle. The text then reads: But they presumed to go up to the heights of the hill country, although neither the ark of the covenant of the LORD nor Moses departed out of the camp [Num. 14:44]. The word ו יּ ע פּ לוּ [văyyă pĭlû] is translated here, But they presumed, which has the same root עפל [ pl; to presume, be heedless ] as the word in 2:4a. 55 Also, in order to keep intact the juxtaposition of the two kinds of people being displayed in this verse, this word choice seems to work. Roberts explains how this verb is probably in a corrupted form, and then suggests that the 57.עפל [ yp; vb. to be faint ; adj. faint, weary ] 56 instead of עיף root is Roberts then translates 53 O'Brien, These are the only two places in the Hebrew Scriptures with the same [apparent] root. 55 BDB, Ibid., Roberts,

21 the Hebrew as: Now the fainthearted. 58 He further explains how this would make sense following the idea in v. 3 of one having to wait for the vision to arrive. 59 One could hardly argue with this correlation. For the second part of this phrase, Roberts offers the following: his soul will not walk in it. He gathers this from the same word order found in 1 Samuel 6:12, where it speaks of the cows walking straight, turning neither to the right nor to the left. This particular translation cannot be argued against here either. The translation offered above does not significantly conflict with Roberts [i.e., a presumptuous one will, in a sense, faint away, in that he loses patience at some point. And, one's soul who does not walk in it is a person whose soul is not upright ]. Andersen translates the noun נ פ שׁוֹ [năfshô] as throat, and provides the translation: Behold, swollen, not straight, is his throat in him. 60 He bases this on the same word being used in 2:5, which he also renders as throat [ who enlarged his throat like Sheol ]. 61 There is no need, however, to read into the commonly used noun נ פ שׁ [něfěsh] a meaning other than its basic, most common meaning soul. In the context of this verse, and pericope, it fits rather well. The soul that is not י שׁ ר [yāshǎr; upright ], is indeed the opposite of one that is צ דּ יק [ righteous ; also, to see how י שׁ ר and צ דּ יק are used synonymously cf. Ps 11:7; 32:11; 33:1; 64:10; 112:4; Prov 21:18; 29:27; Is 26:7; Hos 14:9]. The second part of this verse, as was alluded to in the introduction, could be considered the most important focus of the entire work presented here. If it is true, as Seifrid suggests, that the Apostle Paul's ground for his gospel is this phrase, and like Rabbi Simlai stated, it is the 58 Ibid., Ibid., Andersen, Ibid. 20

22 most succinct summary of Torah, then a lot would be riding on an accurate translation, and especially interpretation. Although the third, masculine, singular, possessive suffix וֹ could, according to grammatical rules, legitimately be translated as it, the context, in and surrounding this verse, gives more support to translate it as his. 62 On top of the aforementioned observations, the usage of ה נּ ה [hĭnnēh; behold! or look! ] at the beginning of this sentence, similar to most other usages of it throughout the Scriptures, is an indicator of a shift in focus. In other words, YHWH has been talking about one thing in vv. 2-3 [i.e., the vision] and now brings Habakkuk's attention to something else. This does not imply a sharp change in subjects per se, but maybe a slight head turn to address something new that is applicable to what was just stated. To begin, it might be most important that one translate the noun in בּ א מוּנ תוֹ correctly. Most Protestant Bibles translate א מוּנ ה as faith [i.e., his faith ]. 63 O'Brien admits that this traditional rendering is based on Paul's use of it in Romans 1:17 and Galatians 3: No where else in the Hebrew Scriptures is א מוּנ ה translated as faith ; therefore, based on these two observations, it would be anachronistic to suggest this translation. This is important to underscore because, unfortunately, there is in today's common usage a disconnect between one having faith and one being faithful. 65 אָמ ן means firmness, steadfastness, fidelity. It's rooted in the verb א מוּנ ה The noun [ āmǎn], which means to be firm, to build up, to support, to nurture, or to establish. 66 This 62 suffix. on the end is the possessive וֹ [bě emŭnātô] - the בּ א מוּנ תוֹ 63 See the NIV, NRSV, NASB, KJV. Some, however, footnote the alternate faithfulness. 64 O'Brien, 77. Also see R. Laird Harris, Gleason L. Archer and Bruce K. Waltke, Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament [TWOT]. Vol. 1 (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980), See John B. Cobb and David J. Lull, Romans, in Chalice Commentaries for Today (St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2005), BDB,

23 ,א מוּנ ה leaves no doubt that a certain, appropriate response is expected by the person who possess whether YHWH or a human. Biblically speaking, to have faith and be faithful mean the same thing. 67 Furthermore, it is entirely pertinent here for one to see and understand the consistent correlation between א מוּנ ה and YHWH's covenant relationship with Israel. The word מוּנ ה,א in some form, is found forty-nine times throughout the Hebrew Scriptures. Twenty-two of those times occur in the Psalms [cf. Ps 33.4; 36.5; 37.3; 40.20; 88.11; 89.1, 2, 5, 8, 24, 33, 49; 92.2; 96.13; 98.3; 100.5; , 75, 86, 90, 138; 143.1] and in all but one of those instances א מוּנ ה is generally translated as faithfulness. It is used in connection to YHWH as a sort of divine attribute. 68 An example of this common usage is Psalm 100:5. Psalm 119:30 uses the term when describing YHWH s design for living. For the LORD is good; His loving kindness is everlasting and His faithfulness to all generations. [Psalm 100:5; italics indicates location] I have chosen the faithful way; I have placed Your ordinances before me. [Psalm 119:30] With this mind, going back to the first use of א מוּנ ה in the Scriptures would be further indicative of the concept behind the word. The term used here describes Moses hands as he held his staff in the air during Israel s battle with the Amalekites: But Moses' hands were heavy. Then they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat on it; and Aaron and Hur supported his hands, one on one side and one on the other. Thus his hands were steady until the sun set. [Exodus 17:12; italics indicates location] 67 This is the idea of behind James 2: BDB,

24 To say his hands were steady begs the question: What were Moses hands being steady in reference to? His hands were not steady in the lowered position, but rather in an uplifted position. Likewise, throughout the Psalms when the word א מוּנ ה is used in connection to YHWH, the same consideration should be given: What is YHWH being faithful in relation to? What else is YHWH s faithfulness in reference to but his covenant promise to his chosen people? Admittedly, this line of thought supports the connection of א מוּנ ה to the vision [or YHWH], as Roberts and Andersen suggest. However, the idea of a righteous one living according to his faithfulness to the covenant is equally valid, and again, in this context more descriptive of what YHWH seems to be communicating. The presumptuous one, similar to Israel who went to battle contrary to YHWH's command, does not live by his faithfulness to YHWH's covenant instructions; his soul is not upright in him. The righteous one, however, who apparently has already been deemed righteous, lives according to his faithfulness to YHWH. 69 This living is in no way here a soteriological description in the modern sense of the term, rather, it is a label for the kind of life YHWH has ordained for his chosen people. [This latter point will be addressed further below.] Whether or not the connection was originally intended, the latter part of v. 4 is not only a contrast to the first part, but it also seems to be antithetical to the description of the Chaldean [king?] in 1: The picture being portrayed in these verses is that of an individual [or nation] who, because of his success in plundering others with his net and dragnet, which create the luxurious life and fills his belly with rich food, he then turns and sacrifices to his net. Implied is the idea that this person relies on his net for his livelihood. 70 Therefore, he sacrifices to his 69 See Andersen, p. 215 for a more descriptive reason why he concludes the faithfulness is attached to the vision and not to the righteous one. 70 Both the ESV and NIV translations pick up this idea. 23

25 net and makes offerings to his dragnet. Israel was to make sacrifices and bring offerings to YHWH, which, according to their theology, was a part of what YHWH commanded them in order that they may live [cf. Deut 6:24-25; 30:16]. Therefore, it seems appropriate and accurate that the faithfulness of a righteous one is the means by which that person will experience the kind of life that YHWH intended for his people. In other words, just as the Chaldean relies on his net to provide life, in contrast, a righteous person, by his faithfulness to YHWH, will establish and maintain a kind of living that is in accord with YHWH's design; which would be what is considered real living, as opposed to the Chaldean who was living amiss. Roberts catches the observation behind this when he says: In the context of Habakkuk's oracle, however, the verb "will live" refers to the life in the interim before the time fixed for the fulfillment of the vision Because the righteous person trusts in the reliability of God's promise contained in the vision, he or she is free to live in the present, no matter how unjust or oppressive it may be. 71 YHWH turns Habakkuk's attention to how one can respond to the vision [which has yet to be given]. One can be presumptuous, that is, go his own way as if he knows better than YHWH, thinking his actions might deter YHWH's fixed time. The one whose soul is not upright is characteristic of those who turn to the right hand or to the left [cf. Deut 5:32; 17:20; 28:14; Prov 4:26-27; Josh 23:6]. The other option is the one who is faithful to what YHWH has already commanded in his torah. The dichotomy displayed here is one of the most fundamental and significant contrasts in all the Scriptures the righteous and unrighteous. 71 Roberts, 112. Cf. also Walvoord, 1:

26 SYNTHESIS Habakkuk sees wickedness daily. His soul is weary and grieves from the injustices and perversion of YHWH's law [1:4]. He calls upon YHWH for salvation, but YHWH answers with an ubelievable plan that eventually stirs up the Chaldeans who strap their yoke upon Judah causing the injustices continue. Habakkuk's burden grows heavy so he stations himself at his watch with the sole purpose of obtaining an answer from YHWH regarding his earlier complaint and question [1:12-17]. Some unknown amount of time passes, and then, YHWH answers: Write it down on the tablets, and make it plain... Habakkuk is given the impression that this answer the vision is supposed to be a vehicle of hope for Israel; Make sure it's clear! It will come at the appointed time, so if it seems to delay, be patient. What I'm going to say will indeed come about. And just to be sure you understand what is most important, recall the way of the arrogant, how his soul is not upright. Remember, the righteous person, the one who trusts in me, walks in the way and there, finds life. Not only is Habakkuk given the assurance that YHWH has heard his cry and plans to act in accord to it, but he also receives an encouraging reminder and promise A righteous one, by his faithfulness, will live. Andersen's words are fitting here: The two realities God and the world do not seem to fit. The task of making them fit is daunting. When the misery of existence becomes intolerable there are two ways out, both extreme, by denying one or the other of the two realities. God can be detached from the world; either he isn't interested, or he isn't even there. A person can detach from the world; the world can be rejected as meaningless, corrupt, or even an illusion. In its most radical form, such disengagement can deny the reality of both God and the world, seeking relief in the nirvana of nothingness. 25

27 Biblical faith holds on tenaciously to both realities. The world is real; the God who made it all is also real. This is what Habakkuk believes. He manages somehow to survive by faith [2:4b]. 72 Habakkuk 2:1-4 seem to be an introduction to the vision [which is the answer from YHWH concerning Habakkuk's complaint]. Despite the location of this introduction, the vision does not seem to be given until 3:3, which continues through verse 15. The remainder of chapter 2 consists of the woe oracles, which are first against the oppressive nation, Babylon, but then also the unrighteous natives of Judah [cf. 2:15-19]. These five woes can probably be applied universally, as well. 73 Chapter 3 begins with another superscription, Habakkuk acknowledges YHWH, intercedes for Israel, and then the vision is recorded [cf. 3:3-15]. 74 Contrary to this conclusion, however, Heschel states: Habakkuk's vision remains unknown to us. Its content is not put into words. It clearly was a vision of redemption at the end of days. There is an answer to Habakkuk's question. It is an answer, not in terms of thought, but terms of events. God's answer will happen, but it cannot be spelled out in words. The answer will surely come; "if it seems slow, wait for it." True, the interim is hard to bear; the righteous one is horrified by what he sees. To this the great answer is given: "The righteous shall live by his faith." It is an answer, again not in terms of thought, but in terms of existence. Prophetic faith is trust in Him [sic], in Whose [sic] presence stillness is a form of understanding. 75 Also contrary to the above conclusion, Andersen states that the vision consists precisely of the 'woe oracles' [cf. 2:6-19]. 76 O'Brien comments, The traditional translation of 2:4 sets this verse as the answer of God to the problem of injustice. 77 However, Brueggemann supports that 72 Andersen, They resemble many of the Proverbs in their principles. 74 Roberts, Abraham J. Heschel, The Prophets: An Introduction (New York: Harper&Row, 1962), Andersen, O'Brien,