The Remnant Chastened

Verses 10-19:

Priestly Sins And Indifference Of People Bring Chastening

Verse 10 announces beginning of the third major message of Haggai the prophet, to the Jewish remnant. It came in December, two months and one day after the 1st, v. 1. During this time the Jews had made rapid progress in the work of rebuilding the Temple, v. 15-18.

Verse 11 challenges Haggai to inquire of the priests regarding the law. For they were administrators of its rites, which they were to perform in an holy, sanctified manner, Lev 10:10-11; Deu 33:10; Eze 44:23; Mal 2:7.

Verse 12 continues the inquiry of the priests concerning cleanliness of sacrifices, according to the law, Holy flesh, flesh dedicated to a sacrifice, carried in a shirt, also considered holy or dedicated, could not touch, be permitted to touch bread, pottage, wine, oil, or meat, without both the food touched and the sacrifice becoming unholy or unsanctified. The holy and the unholy were not to have accord, or communion, in Divine worship, is the idea. This is why all Divine worship should be preceded by confession of sins and prayer, 1Jn 1:8-9; 1Ti 2:1; 2 Chronicles 7; 2 Chronicles 14, Luk 18:1.

Verse 13 relates Haggai’s further inquiry of the priests regarding acceptable behavior in prayer and Divine worship. He asked if one who is unclean by a dead body should touch any of these (sacrifices) wouldn’t it be unclean, unacceptable as an offering. The answer was, “yes”. One drop of filth can pollute a glass of water, even so, all of man’s deeds of righteousness (moral deeds), can never cleanse him from the depravity and pollution of his own sins, Num 19:11; Num 19:13; Num 19:22. Our righteousness is as filthy rags in His sight, Isa 64:6; Tit 3:5; Joh 3:3; Joh 3:5.

Verse 14 states Haggai’s direct explanation of the immediate meaning and implication of the unclean persons and sacrifice offerings, where any had touched a dead body, yet proceed to worship in that unclean condition. He explained that both the Jewish people and nation were unclean before the Lord, and the works of their hands, and their formal sacrifices. The people were not made clean by the sacrifices they had made for near 15 years, upon the open air altar built under Cyrus, after which they had ceased building the Temple; Yet they repeatedly made the sacrifice offerings in the open air. In this the works of their hands were refused by the Lord, Ezr 3:3; Heb 9:13; 1Sa 15:22; Heb 9:14.

Verse 15 recounts Haggai’s call upon the people to consider or reflect on the troubles that had befallen them, since they laid the foundation of the Temple, some 15 years earlier, then ceased building it for fear of the heathen around them, and began making many formal sacrifices on the open air altar. But “to obey is better than to sacrifice and to harken is better than the fat of many rams,” 1Sa 15:12; Hos 14:9; Mal 3:6; Rom 6:21.

Verse 16 calls attention to the reduction of yield in their crops of the fields and vineyards since they laid the foundation of the Temple, began building well, then quit the work. Knowing to do good and doing it not is sin against God, Jas 4:17. And the sin of neglect to obey God is as surely an offense to Him as outward deeds of moral violence.

Verse 17 recounts the Lord’s declaration that it was He who had smitten them in recent years with blasting, drought, mildew, and hail upon the labors of their hands, as forewarned in their own law, because of disobedience toward Him; Yet they had not repented or returned, for all these years (15 years), to complete their Temple of worship first, around which He purposed to then bless them with material things, Exo 32:26; Amo 4:9. See also Gen 41:6; Gen 41:23; Gen 41:27; Deu 28:22; Deu 28:27; 1Ki 8:37; 2Ch 6:29; Jer 5:2; Amo 4:9; Amo 8:11; Zec 1:2-4.

Verse 18 challenges the priests and people of the restored Jewish remnant, who had begun the rebuilding of the Temple with enthusiasm, to reflect what had happened to their people in the past fifteen years, as a basis on which to retrench and do better from this hour, without faltering, until their task of rebuilding the Temple was done, Zec 8:9; Gal 6:9.

Verse 19 asks if the seed is yet in the barn? implying that it was not, but had been sown in vain the previous season. Yet, through their continued obedience in building the Temple, as an act of priority of obedience to Him, He pledged they would see prosperity, and come to have plenty on the vine, the fig tree, and the pomegranate. Obedience to God is the seed of prosperity, Mat 6:33; Hab 2:3.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

Though interpreters seem to perceive the meaning of the Prophet, yet no one really and clearly expresses what he means and intends to teach us: nay, they adduce nothing but what is jejune and frigid; for they refer all these things to this point,—that sacrifices were not acceptable to God before the people had begun to build the Temple, but that from that time they were pleasing to God, because the people, in offering sacrifices in a waste place, proved by such negligence that they disregarded the command of God: but when their hands were applied to the work, God was appeased, and thus he began to accept their sacrifices which before he had rejected. This is, indeed, a part of what is meant, but not the whole; and the Prophet’s main object seems to me to be wholly different. He has been hitherto exhorting the people to build the Temple; he now exhorts them to build from a pure motive, and not to think that they had done everything when the Temple assumed a fine appearance before the eyes of men, for God required something else. Hence, I have no doubt but that the Prophet intended here to raise up the minds of the people to the spiritual worship of God.

It was, indeed, necessary diligently to build the Temple, but the end was also to be regarded; for God never cared for external ceremonies; nor was he delighted with that building as men are with their splendid houses. As the Jews absurdly ascribed these gross feelings to God, the Prophet here shows why so strict a command had been given as to the building of the Temple; and the reason was,—that God might be worshipped in a pure and holy manner.

I will repeat again what I have said, that the explanation may be more familiar to you. When the people neglected the building of the Temple, they manifested their impiety and their contempt of Divine worship: for what was the cause of their delay and tardiness, except that each of them regarded nothing but just his own private interest? Now, when all of them strenuously undertook the work of building the Temple, their industry was indeed laudable, for it was a proof of their piety: but when the people thought that God required nothing more than a splendid Temple, it was manifest superstition: for the worship of God, we know, is corrupted when it is confined to external things; for, in this manner God is transformed into a nature not his own: as he is a Spirit, so he must be spiritually worshipped by us. Whosoever then obtrudes on him only external pomps in order to pacify him, most childishly trifles with him. This second part, in my view, is what the Prophet now undertakes to handle. From the seventh to the ninth month they had been diligently engaged in the work which the Lord had commanded them to do: but men, as we know, busy themselves with external things and neglect spiritual worship; hence it was necessary to join what is said here, that the people might understand, that it was not enough to satisfy God, though they spared neither expense nor labor in building the Temple; but that something greater was required, even to worship God in it in a pure and holy manner. This is the design of the whole passage. But we must first examine the Prophet’s words, and then it will be easier to gather the whole import of his doctrine.

He says then that he was ordered by God, on the twenty fourth day of the month, in the same year, in the second year of Darius, to ask the priests concerning the law (148) Haggai is not bid to inquire respecting the whole law, but only that the priests should answer a question according to the Word of God, or the doctrine of the law according to what is commonly said—What is law, is the question: for it was not allowed to the priests to allege anything they pleased indiscriminately; but they were only interpreters of the law. This is the reason why God bids his Prophet to inquire what the law of Moses defines as to the ceremony mentioned here. And the design was, that the people, being convinced as to the legal ceremonies, might not contend nor glamour, but acknowledge that all sorts are condemned as sinful which flow not from a pure and sincere heart.

Haggai asks first, If a man takes holy flesh —that is, some part of the sacrifice,—if any one takes and carries it in a sleeve or skirt, that is, in any part of his vestment, and then touches bread, or oil, or any eatable thing, will anything connected with that holy flesh be sanctified by mere touch? The priests answer, No. Here also interpreters grossly mistake: for they take sanctified as meaning polluted, altogether falsely; for there is here a twofold question proposed. Whether holy flesh sanctifies anything it may touch? and then, whether an impure and a polluted man contaminates whatever he may touch? As to the first question, the priests wisely and truly answer, that there is no such efficacy in sacrifices, as that they can sanctify what they may touch: and this is true. The second definition is also most proper, that whatever is touched by an unclean man is polluted, as the law everywhere declares.

The Prophet then accommodates this to his present case, So, he says, is this people, and this nation, and the work of their hands. For as long as they are polluted, however they may spend money in sacrifices, and greatly weary themselves in worshipping God, not only is their labor vain, but whatever they offer is polluted, and is an abomination only. We now understand the words of the Prophet, and so we may now consider the subject.

But before I speak generally of the present subject, I shall first notice what the Prophet says here, that he inquired respecting the law; for it was not allowed to the priests to allege anything they pleased. We indeed know, that they had advanced into such licentiousness, as arbitrarily to demand what God had never commanded, and also to forbid the people what was lawful, the use of which had been permitted by God’s law. But Haggai does not here allow such a liberty to the priests; he does not ask what they thought, but what was required by the law of the Lord. And this is worthy of being noticed; for it is a pernicious evil to exercise an arbitrary control over the conscience. And yet the devil has ever corrupted the worship of God, and the whole system of religion, under the pretense of extolling the authority of the Church. It is indeed true, that the sacerdotal office was very honorable and worthy of respect; but we must ever take heed lest men assume too much, and lest what is thoughtlessly conceded to them should deprive God of what belongs to him; as the case is, we know, under the Papacy. When the Pope seeks to show that all his commands ought without any dispute to be obeyed, he quotes what is found in Deu 17:8 —

‘

If a question arises about the law, the high priest shall judge between what is sacred and profane.’

This is indeed true; but was it permitted to the high priest to disregard God’s law, and foolishly to allege this or that according to his own judgement? Nay, the priest was only an interpreter of the law. Whenever then God bids those pastors to be heard whom he sets over his Church, his will is, as it has been before stated, that he himself should be heard through their mouth. In short, whatever authority is exercised in the Church ought to be subjected to this rule—that God’s law is to retain its own pre-eminence, and that men blend nothing of their own, but only define what is right according to the Word of the Lord. Now this is by the way; I come now to the main point.

The priests answered, that neither flesh, nor oil, nor wine, was sanctified by touching a piece or part of a sacrifice. Why? because a sacrifice sanctifies not things unclean, except by way of expiation; for this, we know, was the design of sacrifices—that men who were polluted might reconcile themselves to God. A right answer was then given by the priests, that unclean flesh or unclean oil is not sanctified by the touch of holy flesh. Why? because the flesh itself was not dedicated to God for this end—to purify what was unclean by a mere touch. Yet, on the other hand, it is most true, that when a man was unclean he polluted whatever he touched. It is commonly thought, that he is said to be unclean in his soul who had defiled himself by touching a corpse; but I differ from this. The word soul is often taken in the law for man himself.—

‘

The soul that eats of what died of itself is polluted; the soul that touches a corpse is polluted.’ (Lev 17:15.)

Hence he is here said to be polluted in his soul, who had an outward uncleanness, as we say in French, Pollu en sa personne. Whosoever then is unclean pollutes by touch only whatever might have been otherwise clean; and the conclusion sufficiently proves that this is the purport of this passage. (149) I have said enough of what the design of the Prophet is, but the subject must be more fully explained.

We know how heedlessly men are wont to deal with God; for they trifle with him like children with their puppets. And this presumption has been condemned, as it is well known, even by heathens. Hardly a Prophet could have inveighed more severely against this gross superstition than Persius, who compares sacrifices, so much thought of by all, to puppets, and shows that other things are required by God, even

A well ordered condition and piety of soul, and an inward purity of mind, and a heart imbued with generous virtue. (150)

He means then that men ought to be imbued with true holiness, and that inwardly, so that there should be nothing fictitious or feigned. He says that they who are such, that is, who have imbibed the true fear of God, do rightly serve him, thought they may bring only a crumb of incense, and that others only profane the worship of God, though they may bring many oxen; for whatever they think avails to cover their filth is polluted by new and repeated filth. And this is what has been expressed by heathen authors: another poet says, –

An impious right hand does not rightly worship the celestials. (151)

So they spoke according to the common judgement of natural knowledge. As to the Philosophers, they ever hold this principle—that no sacrifice is rightly offered to God except the mind be right and pure. But yet the Philosophers, as well as the Poets, adopted this false notion, by which Satan beguiled all men, from the least to the greatest—that God is pacified by ceremonies: hence have proceeded so many expiations, in which foolish men trusted, and by which they thought that God would be propitious to them, thought they obstinately continued daily to procure for themselves new punishments, and, as it were, avowedly to carry on war with God himself.

They admit at this day, under the Papacy, this principle that the true fear of God is necessary, as hypocrisy contaminates all the works of men; nor will they indeed dare to commend those who seek feignedly and triflingly to satisfy God, when they are filled with pride, contempt, and impiety. And yet they will never receive what the Prophet says here—that men not only lose all their labor, but also contract new pollution, when they seek to pacify God by their sacrifices, unaccompanied by inward purity. For whence is that partial righteousness which the Papists imagine? For they say, that if one does not keep the whole law, yet obedience in part is approved by God; and nothing is more common among them than this expression, partial righteousness. If then an adulterer refrains from theft, and lays out in alms some of his wealth, they will have this to be charity, and declare it to be acceptable. Though it proceeds from an unclean man, it is yet made a covering, which is deemed sufficient in some way or another to pacify God. Thus the Papists seek, without exercising any discrimination, to render God bound to them by their works, though they may be full of all uncleanness. We hence see that this error has not sprung up today or yesterday for the first time; but it is inherent in the bones and marrows of men; for they have ever thought that their services please God, though they may be unclean themselves.

Hence this definition must be borne in mind—that works, however splendid they may appear before our eyes, are of no value or importance before God, except they flow from a pure heart. Augustine has very wisely explained this in his fourth book against Julia. He says, that it would be an absurd thing for the faithful to judge of works by the outward appearance; but that they ought to be estimated according to the fountain from which they proceed, and also according to their design. Now the fountain of works I consider to be integrity of heart, and the design or end is, when the object of men is to obey God and to consecrate their life to him. Hence then we learn the difference between good and evil works, between vices and virtues, that is, from the inward state of the mind, and from the object in view. This is the subject of the Prophet in the first clause; and he drew an answer from the priests, which was wholly consistent with the law; and it amounted to this, that no work, however praised and applauded by the world, is valued before God’s tribunal, except it proceeds from a pure heart.

Now as to the second part, it is no less difficult to convince men of its truth—that whatever they touch is contaminated, when they are themselves unclean; and yet this is what God had plainly made known to the Jews: and the priests hesitated not nor doubted, but immediately returned an answer, as though the matter was well known—that an unclean man contaminates whatever thing he touches. But when we come to apply the subject, men then reject what they had been clearly taught; nay, what they are forced to confess, until they see the matter brought home to them, and then they begin to accuse God of too much rigour: “Why is this, that whatever we touch is polluted, though we might leave some defilement? Are not our works still deserving of some praise, as they are good works?” And hence also is the common saying, That works, which are in their kind good, are always in a measure meritorious, and though they are without faith, they yet avail to merit the gift of faith, inasmuch as they are in themselves praiseworthy, as chastity, liberality, sobriety, temperance, beneficence, and all alms giving. But God declares that these virtues are polluted, though men may admire them, and that they are only abominable filth, except the heart be really cleansed and purified. Why so? because nothing can flow from an impure and polluted fountain but what is impure and polluted.

It is now easy to understand how suitably the Prophet had led the priests and the whole people to see this difference. For if he had abruptly said this to them—that no work pleased God, except the doer himself had been cleansed from every defilement, there would have arisen immediately many disputations: “Why will God reject what is in itself worthy of praise? When one observes chastity, when another liberally lays out a part of his property, when a third devotes himself wholly to promote the good of the public, when magnanimity and firmness shine forth in one, when another cultivates the liberal arts—are not these such virtues as deserve some measure of praise!” Thus a great glamour would have been raised among the people, had not Haggai made this kind of preface—that according to the law what is unclean is not sanctified by the touch of holy flesh, and also that whatever is touched by an unclean person is polluted. What the law then prescribed in its rituals silenced all those clamours, which might have immediately arisen among the people. Moreover, though ceremonies have now ceased and are no longer in use, yet what God has once declared still retains its force—that whatever we touch is polluted by us, except there be a real purity of heart to sanctify our works.

Let us now inquire how our works please God: for no one is ever found to be pure and perfect, as the most perfect are defiled with some vices; so that their works are always sprinkled with some spots and blemishes, and contract some uncleanness from the hidden filth of their hearts. In answer to this, I say first, that all our works are corrupt before God and abominable in his sight, for the heart is naturally corrupt: but when God purifies our hearts by faith, then our works begin to be approved, and obtain praise before him; for the heart is cleansed by faith, and purity is diffused over our works, so that they begin to be pleasing to God. For this reason Moses says, that Abel pleased God with his sacrifices,

“

The Lord had respect to Abel and to his gifts.” (Gen 4:4.)

Had Moses said only, that the sacrifices of Abel were approved by God, he would have spoken unadvisedly, or at least obscurely; for he would have been silent on the main thing. But he begins with the person, as though he had said, that Abel pleased God, because he worshipped him with an upright and sincere heart. He afterwards adds, that his sacrifices were approved, for they proceeded from the true fear of God and sincere piety. So Paul, when speaking of the real keeping of the law, says, that the end of the law is love from a pure heart and faith unfeigned. (1Ti 1:5.) He shows then that no work is deemed right before God, except it proceeds from that fountain, even faith unfeigned, which is always connected with an upright and sincere heart. This is one thing.

Secondly, we must bear in mind how God purifies our hearts by faith. There is indeed a twofold purification: He first forms us in his image, and engraves on us true and real fear, and an obedient disposition. This purity of the heart diffuses itself over our works; for when we are imbued with true piety, we have no other object but to offer ourselves and all we have to God. Far indeed are they who are hypocrites and profane men from having this feeling; nay, they are wholly alienated from it: they offer liberally their own things to God, but they wish to be their own masters; for a hypocrite will never give up himself as a spiritual sacrifice to God. We hence see how faith purifies our hearts, and also purifies our works: for having been regenerated by the Spirit of God, we offer to him first ourselves and then all that we have. But as this purgation is never found complete in man, it is therefore necessary that there should come an aid from gratuitous acceptance. Our hearts then are purified by faith, because God imputes not to us that uncleanness which remains, and which defiles our works. As then God regards with gracious acceptance that purity which is not as yet perfect, so he causes that its contagion should not reach to our works. When Abel offered sacrifices to God, he was indeed perfect, inasmuch as there was nothing feigned or hypocritical in him: but he was a man, we know, encompassed with infirmity. It was therefore necessary for his remaining pollution to have been purified by the grace of Christ. Hence it was that his sacrifices were accepted: for as he was accepted, so God graciously received whatever proceeded from him.

We now then see how men, while in a state of nature, displease God by their works, and can bring nothing but what is corrupt, filthy, and abominable. We farther see how the children of God, after having been renewed by his Spirit, come pure to him and offer him pure sacrifices: they come pure, because it is their object to devote themselves to God without any dissimulation; but as this devotedness is never perfect, God supplies the defect by a gratuitous imputation, for he embraces them as his servants in the same manner as though they were entirely formed in all righteousness. And in the same way he approves of their works, for all their spots are wiped away, yea, those very spots, which might justly prevent all favor; were not all uncleanness washed away by the blood of Christ, and that through faith.

We hence learn, that there is no ground for any one to deceive himself with vain delusions, by attempting to please God with great pomp: for the first thing of which the Prophet treats here is always required, that is, that a person must be pure in his heart, that inward purity must precede every work. And though this truth meets us everywhere in all the Prophets, yet as hypocrisy dazzles our eyes and blinds all our senses, it ought to be seriously considered by us; and we ought to notice in an especial manner not only this passage but other similar passages where the Prophets ridicule the solicitude of the people, when they busied themselves with sacrifices and outward observances, and neglected the principal thing—real purity of heart.

We must also take notice of what the Prophet says in the last verse, that so was every work of their hand and whatever they offered (152) It seems apparently a hard matter, that the very sacrifices were condemned as polluted. But it is no wonder that fictitious modes of worship, by which profane men dishonor God, should be repudiated by him; for they seek to transform him according to their own fancy, as though he might be soothed by playthings or such trifles. It is therefore a most disgraceful mockery when men deal thus with God, offering him only external ceremonies, and disregarding his nature: for they make no account of spiritual worship, and yet think that they please him. We must then, in a word, make this remark—that the Prophet teaches us here, that it is not enough for men to show obedience to God, to offer sacrifices, to spend labor in building the Temple, except these things were rightly done—and how rightly? by a sincere heart, so there should be no dissimulation, no duplicity.

(148) This clause is literally rendered by Newcome —”Ask now the law from the priests;” or, according to the order of the words, “Ask now from the priests the law.”— Ed.

(149) The words are [ טמא-נפש ], polluted of soul, or polluted soul. When pollution by a carcase or a dead body is meant, the preposition [ ל ] is put before [ נפש ]. See Num 5:2. A polluted person seems to be intended here, without any reference to the way in which he became so; and this is sufficient for the purpose of the Prophet. Theodoret takes this sense —ἀκάθαρτόν τινα— “an unclean person.” But most agree with our version; so do Jerome, Dathius, Newcome, Henderson, and others—“the polluted by a dead body.”— Ed.

(150) Compositum jus, fasque animi, sanctosque recesssus Mentis, et incoctum generoso pectus honesto.— Per. Sat. 2. 74.

(151) Non ben celestes impia dextra colit.

(152) The literal rendering of the verse would be as follows,—

Then answered Haggai and said, — Such is this people and such is this nation, Before me, saith Jehovah; Yea, such is every work of their hands, And what they offer there, polluted it is.

The Prophet seems to have pointed to the altar on which they offered their sacrifices, when he says, “What they offer there.” Both Newcome and Henderson are evidently wrong in rendering the passage in the past tense. The last verb is future, used, as it is often, as a present. So we render it in Welsh, (lang. cy) yr hyn a aberthant yna ; but we understand it as a present act. We may notice here what is often the character of the Prophetic style; the two last lines explain more particularly what the two first contain.— Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

CRITICAL NOTES.]

Hag. 2:10.] This prophecy two months later than those preceding in this chapter.

Hag. 2:11-13.] To convince them of their unworthiness, they must learn from their legal advisers two thingsno holy objects could communicate holiness to things or persons who touched them (Lev. 6:20); but whatever an unclean person touched was unclean (Num. 19:22).

Hag. 2:14. So] The nation in its attitude toward the Lord resembles, on the one hand, a man who carries holy flesh in the lappet of his garment; and, on the other, a man who has become unclean through touching a corpse [Keil]. Unclean] By their habits of sin, all their worship, character, and lives were impure.

HOMILETICS

DUTY NEGLECTED CONTAMINATES CHARACTER AND CONDUCT.Hag. 2:10-14

The people suffering from scarcity of food consequent upon the failure of their crops had, it seems, been continuing in some measure their regular sacrificial offerings, though they had been neglecting the building of the temple. These oblations had not been accepted, as they might have inferred from the withdrawal of the divine blessing, the true cause of which is now impressively illustrated. As he who was ceremonially unclean tainted everything with which he came in contact, so had they suffering from Gods displeasure, on account of their disregard of his claims, communicated the effects of that displeasure to all the labour of their hands, which profited them nothing [Lange]. Attendance upon outward ordinances will not sanctify the character and render those acceptable to God who neglect their duty.

I. This truth is illustrated by divine teaching. Ask now the priests concerning the law, and it will prove two things.

1. That sacred things cannot communicate holiness to what they touch. The flesh of the sacrifice might hallow the skirt in which it was carried (Lev. 6:27), but did not transmit virtue to meat and drink. The altar does not sanctify the gift, nor the temple the land. Corn, wine, and oil are merely common produce. No special blessing rests upon the fruits of the land, on account of its sacredness.

2. That an unclean person contaminates whatever he touches (Num. 19:22). Legal sanctity is not so readily communicated as legal impurity. So the paths to sin are manifold; the path to holiness one, and that one of difficult access [Grotius]. Thus prophet and priest act in accordance with their proper functions, and teach the same lessons. One expounds the law, and the other applies it (Lev. 10:10-11; cf. Isa. 8:20).

II. This truth is proved in human life. So is this people, and so is this nation before me. Here the two cases are applied. By the first the nation is not made holy by its offerings; by the second, by their disobedience, they pollute what they offer.

1. It is proved in Divine worship. And that which they offer there is unclean. Like character, like worship. However splendid the gifts or beautiful the actions in themselves, they will not remove impurity of life through neglect of duty. The possession of sacred privileges will not counterbalance disobedience.

2. It is proved in daily life. So is every work of their hands. Not only in their offering, but also in their works are they unclean. Impurity in heart will not sanctify in works. Those whose devotions are plausible, but whose conversation is wicked, will find their devotions unable to sanctify their enjoyments, and their wickedness prevailing to pollute them. Unto the pure all things are pure, but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 2

Hag. 2:12-14. Priests. The ceremonial institutes of the ancient law were designed to illustrate mans relation to God, as being under his favour or under his displeasure. The conditions and treatment of uncleanness, while setting forth most vividly the loathsomeness and defilement of sin, exhibited as clearly the effects of Gods anger against it, which was shown to extend to all the sinners experience, removing him beyond the reach of covenant mercies and blessings. While the Divine displeasure was manifested towards an individual or a nation, no amount of outward religious observances could appease it, just as no frequency of contact with legally consecrated offerings could impart sacredness to any other object [Lange].

Fuente: The Preacher’s Complete Homiletical Commentary Edited by Joseph S. Exell

THE THIRD MESSAGE . . . Hag. 2:10-19

RV . . . In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of Jehovah by Haggai the prophet, saying, Thus saith Jehovah of hosts: Ask now the priests concerning the law, saying, If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any food, shall it become holy? And the priests answered and said, No. Then Said Haggai, If one that is unclean by reason of a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It Shall be unclean. Then answered Haggai and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith Jehovah; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is unclean. And now, I pray you, consider from this day and backward, before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of Jehovah. Through all that time, when one came to a heap of twenty measures, there were but ten; when one came to the winevat to draw out fifty vessels, there were but twenty. I smote you with blasting and with mildew and with hail in all the work of your hands; yet ye turned not to me, saith Jehovah. Consider, I pray you, from this day and backward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, since the day that the foundation of Jehovahs temple was laid, consider it. Is the seed yet in the barn? Yea, the vine, and the fig-tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive-tree have not brought forth; from this day will I bless you.

LXX . . . On the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, the word of the Lord came to Aggaeus the prophet, saying, Thus saith the Lord Almighty; Inquire now of the priests concerning the law, saying, If a man should take holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and the skirt of his garment should touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No. And Aggaeus said, If a defiled person is unclean by reason of a dead body, touch any of these, shall it be defiled? And the priests answered and said, It shall be defiled. And Aggaeus answered and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the Lord; and so are all the works of their hands: and whosoever shall approach them, shall be defiled (because of their early burdens: they shall be pained because of their toils; and ye have hated him that reproved in the gates.) And now consider, I pray you, from this day and beforetime, before they laid a stone on a stone in the temple of the Lord, what manner of men ye were. When ye cast into the cornbin twenty measures of barley, and there were only ten measures of barley: and ye went to the vat to draw out fifty measures, and there were but twenty. I smote you with barrenness, and with blasting, and all the works of your hands with hail; yet ye returned not to me, saith the Lord. Set your hearts now to think from this day and upward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day when the foundation of the temple of the Lord was laid; consider in your hearts, whether this shall be known on the corn-floor, and whether yet the vine, and the fig-tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive-trees that bear no fruit are with you: from this day will I bless you.

COMMENTS

THE FOUR AND TWENTIETH DAY OF THE NINTH MONTH

. . . Hag. 2:10

The third message came from Jehovah to the prophet Haggai exactly three months after the favorable response of the people to the first message. As the first message cautions against false contentment and the second cautions against false discontentment, the third exhorts them not to build from false motives.

THUS SAITH THE LORD . . . Hag. 2:11

As in the previous messages, so here, Haggai is careful to let his hearers know the message is not his but the Lords.

ASK NOW THE PRIESTS CONCERNING THE LAW . . .

This admonition is followed by two questions. The questions are, in essence, can the holy make the unholy holy and can the unholy make the holy unholy? The priests answers are accurate. To the first they answer no. To the second yes.

A basic principle is revealed here. The influence of holiness is not as far reaching as unholiness. A rotten apple will corrupt a barrel of good apples, but a good apple will not make a barrel of bad ones good.
So is this people. The construction of a holy temple will not automatically sanctify the land or its inhabitants any more than the flesh of a sacrifice will make holy a garment in which it is carried.

When the first temple stood, the people could not believe God would allow evil to come upon them. They made a fetish of the building. It must not happen again by assuming the work of re-building can sanctify an unclean people.
Here is a warning to todays Christian who assumes he is right with God because he associates with an active church, regardless of his personal commitment to God or trust in Jesus.

CONSIDER . . . BACKWARD . . . Hag. 2:15-17

Haggai challenges his people to consider what has happened since they returned from captivity, prior to the beginning of the reconstruction. Conditions have not changed since they began to build. Prosperity did not immediately result from their work on the temple. The reason was the far-reaching result of past neglect. It could not be erased by three months of obedience.

In Hag. 2:17 Haggai indicates that, although the people have resumed building, they have not really returned to the Lord. If they have, it is only recently. Here, just following their return from Babylon, is the beginning of the strange malady confronted by Jesus. This people honoreth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me. (Mat. 15:8) Isaiah had confronted this same spiritual failure in the people prior to the captivity. (Isa. 29:13)

A building program such as that in which Haggais readers were engaged, or a full program of activity in the building, such as that in which Jesus hearers participated, can neither one substitute for genuine commitment to God and concern for His covenant purpose.

CONSIDER . . . BACKWARD . . . Hag. 2:18-19

Again Haggai

calls upon the people to remember. A new era is about to begin, as

indicated in verse fifteen by the transitional phrase and now. This seems to be the reason for Haggais repeated emphasis on dates.

The term in Hebrew does not mean backward exactly, as our versions render it (Hag. 2:15; Hag. 2:18). It is used rather to call attention from the past to the future. Past calamities are contrasted with the beginning of the new period of Jewish history.

The plea seems to be for patience. Since the laying of the first stones there has not been enough time for Jehovah to relieve the wants of the people short of a miracle. The fig and pomegranate and olive harvests are yet on the trees. Their present obedience will yet be rewarded.

Chapter XXIVQuestions

Exposition of Haggai

1.

Write an outline of Haggai.

2.

Haggais first message is concerned with?

3.

What were the results of the first message?

4.

Discuss the ancestry of Zerubbabel in light of Hag. 1:1, 1Ch. 3:17-19, and Luk. 3:27,

5.

The message Haggai was _____________ message.

6.

Haggais first message attacks _____________.

7.

How does the message apply to us who would build the church?

8.

How does Haggai account for the drought and austere conditions which had beset the people?

9.

Discuss Jehovah stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel.

10.

What is the gist of Haggais second message? To whom is it addressed?

11.

What was missing from the second temple?

12.

What is meant by the latter glory of the house?

13.

Discuss Hag. 2:7 in light of Heb. 8:1 -ff and Gal. 3:29.

14.

What is meant by desire of all nations?

15.

What is the gist of Haggais third message?

16.

What false motives might have been involved in rebuilding the temple?

17.

What malady confronting Haggai was also addressed by Jesus?

18.

Show evidence that Haggai considered his message to be Gods rather than his own.

19.

Discuss the shaking of the heavens and earth (Hag. 2:21 cp. Hag. 2:6)

20.

Why could not this shaking have referred to the chaotic conditions of Darius early reign?

21.

Where in the Bible do we find the ultimate fulfillment of this prophecy?

22.

Discuss Zerubbabel as a type of Christ. Show parallels between them.

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series

(10-19) The Fourth Utterance.The recent season of scarcity is again accounted for and immediate blessings are announced. This address dates about two months later than its predecessorviz., from the ninth monthscil., Chisleu (NovemberDecember), when the early rain would be looked for to water the newly-sown crops. At such a time, especially after the scarcity of the preceding season, there would naturally be great anxiety about agricultural prospects.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

The Restoration Of Current Blessing ( Hag 2:10-19 ).

Two months after the previous message, on the day that the foundations or building of the new Temple were finally established, Haggai brings both a warning and a promise. He does this in terms of whether purity and holiness can be passed on by contact, and whether defilement can be passed on by touch. And the answer in the first case is ‘No’ and in the second case is ‘Yes’.

Thus they are to recognise that the presence of the new Temple among them will not be a guarantee of their holiness, for holiness cannot be passed on by contact. On the other hand they are to be aware lest defilement spread among them, which could so easily happen as they come in contact with each other as those who have not fulfilled YHWH’s requirements. The idea may indicate the fact that because the ‘dead body’ of the ruined Temple has been among them, it has continually defiled them.

So the warning is against them thinking that because they are building YHWH’s Temple that in itself will make them holy, and points out why they have been defiled in the past up to this point with the result that their misfortunes have come on them

Hag 2:10

‘In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of YHWH by Haggai the prophet, saying,

This was just two months after the previous prophecy, and three months after the words in chapter 1. That three months would have been a busy time with the gathering in of the harvest of summer fruits and the vintage (disappointing though it was), and the keeping of the feasts of the seventh month, including the Day of Atonement and the Feast of Tabernacles. This would have been followed by the sowing of the seed for the coming year once the rains had come. And at the same time the wood for the building of the Temple would have had to be determined on and collected from the hills (Hag 1:8), the stones which were to be used on the Temple had to be dug out and reshaped, and the area where the Temple was to be built had to be suitably prepared.

Hag 2:11-12

‘Thus says YHWH of hosts, “Ask now the priests concerning the law, saying, “If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any food, shall it become holy?” And the priests answered and said, “No.”

He now publicly asks the priests for a decision on a question of the interpretation of the Law. It was a part of the duty of the priests to explain and interpret the Law, and this demonstrates a fully functional priesthood who were serving the altar that had been built in Jerusalem. In view of the connection by date we are probably to see the two ideas here and in Hag 2:20-23 connected

The question was as to whether holiness could be passed on from a holy object to one that was not holy, by touch. And the answer expected, and given quite specifically, was ‘no’.

The example used was of the flesh of freewill, votive and thanksgiving offerings, and of the flesh which was the priest’s portion from other sacrifices. All these were ‘holy’, and the part of the coat in which they were carried was holy (Lev 6:26-27). But touching that garment did not result in holiness. And the point of this was in order to determine that holiness cannot be passed on merely by contact. He was wanting to bring out that holiness does not work in that way. It rather comes from dedication of something to God. The connection with the foundation of the Temple makes it quite clear that his point in this is that having the Temple among them will not in itself make them holy. Their holiness will depend on what is in their hearts and whether they are obedient to the covenant, on how they behave and on how they live their lives, not on the presence of the Temple.

Hag 2:13

‘Then said Haggai, “If one who is unclean by reason of a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean?” And the priests answered and said, “It shall be unclean.”

The next question was to whether contact with a dead thing will render a man unclean, and the expected reply is, ‘Yes’, for that was the clear teaching of the Law.

Hag 2:14

‘Then answered Haggai and said, “So is this people, and so is this nation before me,” says YHWH, “and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is unclean.”

In that case, replies Haggai, so is this people unclean, and so is the nation in front of him, including everything that they do and everything that they offer. (For ‘this people’ compare Hag 1:2. It clearly refers to the people that Haggai is speaking with, and indicates that they are to some extent at least not His people). This would seem to indicate that their uncleanness is due to their not having built the Temple. Not having a Temple can render them unclean, because the old Temple is as a dead thing among them. Having a Temple, however, will not render them holy, for the reason already given. Nevertheless if they re to be clean they must carry on with the building of the Temple

Hag 2:15

“And now, I pray you, consider from this day upwards (backward or forward), before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of YHWH,”

As a consequence of his argument he now asks them to consider what has happened in the past and what is happening now as a result of the fact that no stones for the Temple have actually been laid, even though a great deal of preparatory work has already been done..

Hag 2:16-17

“Through all that time, when one came to a heap of twenty measures, there were but ten,

When one came to the winevat to draw out fifty vessels, there were but twenty.

I smote you with blasting and with mildew and with hail in all the work of your hands;

And nothing you to me, says YHWH.”

What has happened over that time? The answer is that productivity has been miserable, and all the elements that trouble farmers have been against them. And the result was that they had only had disappointing harvests of various products and of wine once it was all gathered in and stored.

And part of the reason was because they had been smitten by the scorching east wind, by mildew and by hail. These are often described as instruments of YHWH’s judgments. Consider Deu 28:22; Amo 4:9.

‘And nothing you to me.’ This could mean, ‘you meant nothing to me’, or ‘you gave me nothing acceptable’ (it was all unclean – Hag 2:14). On the other hand a similar idea in Amos 4-9 is summed up with ‘you did not return to Me’. Thus this may simply mean ‘I received no response from you’. In other words, they had not responded to Him by building the Temple and therefore all these troubles had come on them.

Hag 2:18-19

“Consider, I pray you, from this day and upwards (forward), from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, since the day that the foundation of YHWH’s temple was laid, consider it. Is the seed yet in the barn? Yes, the vine, and the fig-tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive-tree have not brought forth. From this day will I bless you.”

That has been the past as a result of their failing to build the Temple of YHWH through apathy and fear. But what now about the future? What does the future hold now that they have laid the foundation of YHWH’s Temple (or have started to restore YHWH’s Temple)? It does not look good. They have sown what seed they had and now there is nothing left in the barn if the harvests fail. The vine and the fig-tree and the pomegranate have previously been unproductive. So what will happen? YHWH give His answer, ‘From this day I will bless you.’ Now that they have demonstrated their faithfulness to Him in a practical way their future is assured. From now on all their efforts will be blessed.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

A Warning Admonition Concerning False Righteousness

v. 10. In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, a little more than two months later, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the Lord by Haggai, the prophet, again by direct inspiration, saying,

v. 11. Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Ask now the priests concerning the Law, saying,

v. 12. If one bear holy flesh In the skirt of his garment, namely, the meat of sacrifices which had been offered, and with his skirt do touch bread or pottage, any of the holy food that was sodden, or wine or oil or any meat, such as was used in offering sacrifices or in connection with sacrificial meals, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No. This was in agreement with the Law, Lev 6:20-27; for though the garment itself was sanctified by such consecrated food, it could impart no holiness to one who, by neglecting the will of the Lord, had become unholy.

v. 13. Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body, by touching a corpse, touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean, again in perfect agreement with the Ceremonial Law of the Jews, Lev 22:4; Num 5:2; Num 9:10.

v. 14. Then answered Haggai and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before Me, saith the Lord, in His presence as Ruler and Judge; and so is every work of their hands, everything that they might undertake; and that which they offer there is unclean. The children of Israel were in disgrace because of their neglect to finish the house of the Lord, and though their land was holy land, consecrated to the Lord, yet its fruits found no favor in His eyes and could not serve to make the people clean by a mere outward service, as long as their hearts were not in the right relation to Him, so that they were constrained to give Him the worship which lie desired.

v. 15. And now, I pray you, consider from this day and upward, by applying their hearts to this problem, from before a stone was laid upon a stone in the Temple of the Lord, before its reconstruction was resumed;

v. 16. since those days were, when one came to an heap of twenty measures, a stack of sheaves which promised a yield of twenty bushels or pecks, there were but ten; when one came to the press-fat for to draw out fifty vessels out of the press, thinking that the harvest should have brought that much, there were but twenty.

v. 17. I smote you with blasting, with blight of the fruits and grains, and with mildew, from excessive moisture, and with hail in all the labors of your hands, the harvests over which they had worked so hard; yet ye turned not to Me, saith the Lord, all His punishments did not have the desired effect.

v. 18. Consider now from this day and upward, applying their hearts to the consideration of that which pertained to their best interests, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day that the foundation of the Lord’s Temple was laid, consider it, for the entire period of time since the Jews, in accordance with the decree of Cyrus, had first laid the foundation till the day of the assembly at which these words were spoken, was a time during which the blessing of the Lord was not poured out in its fullest measure, because all their labor for the new Temple had been fitful.

v. 19. Is the seed yet in the barn? They were still suffering as a consequence of the shortage. Yea, as yet the vine and the fig-tree and the pomegranate and the olive-tree hath not brought forth, the results of their former lack of zeal were still in evidence; from this day will I bless you. Times would now change, since they were showing evidence of the change which had come over their hearts. If men turn to the Lord in true repentance, He may turn to them in mercy and give them blessings of this life in rich measure.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Hag 2:10-14. In the four-and-twentieth day, &c. Three months after they had begun to build the temple, Haggai receives orders from the Lord, to go and propose two questions to the priests, respecting the ceremonies of the law; in order from their answer to draw instruction for the princes and the people. He first asks, whether the sanctified flesh of a sacrifice which a man carried in the lappet of his garment, communicated its sanctity, and rendered the things which he approached and touched with it incapable of being indifferently employed. The priests answer in the negative; upon which the prophet asks again, Hag 2:14 whether a man, who is polluted by having attended a funeral, if he touches any thing eatable, does not communicate his pollution, so as that those who are clean can no longer use it. The priests reply, that the man thus polluted renders whatever he uses or touches unclean: the prophet then in the next verse, in the name of Jehovah, applies this their last answer to the present state of the people: “As a man polluted communicates his pollution to whatever he touches; so, whatever you have hitherto done, and whatever you have offered to me in this temple, hath been polluted in my sight. In vain have you offered to me sacrifices, to avert my anger from your land, and engage me to restore its fertility; I have been deaf to your vows, I have turned away mine eyes from your oblations. You have been smitten with the scourge of my displeasure until now; but inasmuch as you have at length begun to set about my temple, you shall soon behold the effects of my blessings upon you. I will restore fruitfulness to your fields, your vineyards and your olive-trees.” See Hag 2:19. God, to adapt himself to the grossness of the people, and render them more sensible of the fault that they had committed in thus neglecting the re-establishment of his house, observes, that he hitherto considered them all as men defiled by the touch of a dead body, since, instead of exciting his mercy by their offerings, they had only communicated their pollutions to the temple, altar, and victims. See Calmet.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

FOURTH ADDRESS

Past Calamities accounted for; and Immediate Prosperity announced

Hag 2:10-19

10 On the twenty-fourth (day) of the ninth (month) in the second year of Darius, 11there was a word of Jehovah by the hand of Haggai the Prophet, saying: Thus 12saith Jehovah of Hosts: Ask, I pray you, the Priests12 for instruction, saying: If13 a man shall bear holy flesh in the lappet of his garment, and touch with his lappet upon bread, or upon pottage, or upon wine, or upon oil, or upon any food, shall it become holy; and. the Priests answered and said: No. 13And Haggai said: If one defiled14 through a (dead) person touch any of these, shall it be unclean; and the 14Priests answered and said: It shall be unclean. Then Haggai answered and said: So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith Jehovah, and so is every work of their hands; and whatever they offer there [at the altar] is unclean. 15And now, I pray you direct your heart from this day and backward, before the 16placing of stone upon stone in the house of Jehovah. Since such things were,15 one has been going16 to a heap of sheaves of fifty (measures), and there were (but) ten; he has been going to the wine-vat to draw out fifty pails, and there were (but) 17twenty. I have smitten you with blight, and with mildew, and with hailall the works17 of your hands; yet ye (returned)18 not to me, saith Jehovah. 18Direct, I pray you, your hearts from this day and backward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth (month), to the day on which the Temple of Jehovah was founded; direct 19your heart. Is the grain yet in the barn? And as to the vine and the fig tree, and the pomegranate and olive tree, they have not borne.19 From this day I will bless.20

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

The ministry of the Prophet had at last achieved its most important object, and with the access of new zeal and devotion to. Gods service among the people, a powerful impulse had been given to their national and religious life. Another message was now appropriate, and that for the accomplishment of two ends: first, that the people might be forewarned against a course of conduct, which would again alienate the favor of God; second, that they might be further secured against despondency by the prospect of rich and speedy blessings, as the consequence of their repentance and obedience.

Hag 2:10. The message which follows was delivered about two months after the preceding, while the people were still feeling, probably, in an intensified degree, the pressure of the temporal distress which was described in the first discourse. It was an occasion peculiarly suitable for the communication of such a message. It was the ninth month (Chisleu, NovemberDecember) when the early rain was expected to water the newly-sown crops. Their fields had lately (Hag 1:6) been giving a very scanty harvest, and there would naturally be much anxiety about the results of the labor of the present season; and great rejoicing at the receival of an assurance of its success.

Hag 2:11. We agree with Ewald, Koehler, Keil, et al. in regarding here as meaning not the law but instruction. If the former had been intended, the article would have been present. That the answer to the inquiry would be obtained from the law does not of course affect the question.

Hag 2:12. If a man shall bear. and the Priests answered: No. The priests answered correctly and according to a natural and divinely sanctioned inference from Lev 4:20 (27). In that passage the flesh of the animal sacrificed is said to render sacred any object ( there probably refers both to persons and to things) with which it may come in contact, a garment sprinkled with its blood being particularized. It is not said that the character of legal sacredness is communicated indefinitely. The enumeration in our passage of the most common and necessary articles of food is in accordance with the lesson to be enforced; see on Hag 2:14.

Hag 2:13. And Haggai said. he will be unclean. Comparing our verse with Lev 22:4, and that passage with Num 5:2; Num 9:6-7; Num 9:10, we find that the phrase = . defiled with respect to a person. Comparing again with Lev 21:11; Num 6:6, we find that is to be understood in the latter expression, which therefore means: unclean on account of a dead person. The ellipsis is seen to be natural, when we remember that defilement occasioned by personal contact usually proceeded from contact with a dead body, and that this species of defilement was one of the deepest (see Num 19:11-16). Keil translates: defiled on or through the soul of a dead man, a rendering whose correctness he fails to prove both here and in his exposition of Lev 19:28. Besides giving a contradictory explanation, he would refuse to recognize one of the most common meanings of , that of person transferred to the sense of body. The explanation of Koehler is worth quoting. He takes nephesh in its primary sense of breath, and thinks that one who comes in contact with the breath of a dead man is referred to. This he does not seek to establish on the lucus a non lucendo principle, as might be expected, but by the statement that as long as the corpse is not completely consumed, even if the skeleton only is left, a remnant of the breath of life still remains seeking to extricate itself so as to leave the body to perish utterly.Then follows the application to the circumstances of the people of these principles of the Ceremonial Law. It will be noticed that the priests and the prophet act in accordance with their proper functions: the former declare or interpret the precepts of the Law; the latter applies them.

Hag 2:14. And Haggai answered and said is unclean. No distinction is intended to be expressed between nation and people here. The repetition is a hebraism; comp. Zep 2:9. So is this people, etc. = So is it with this people. Before me means: in my presence as Ruler and Judge. The key to the correct application of the ceremonial precepts, which have occasioned difficulty to some interpreters, is found in the last clause of the verse, taking into account that = at the altar (Ezr 3:3). The people, suffering from scarcity of food consequent upon the failure of their crops, had, it seems, been continuing in some measure their regular sacrificial offerings, though they had been neglecting the building of the Temple. These oblations had not been accepted, as they might have inferred from the with-holding of the divine blessing, the true cause of which is now impressively illustrated. As he who was ceremonially unclean tainted everything with which he came in contact, so had they, suffering from Gods displeasure on account of their disregard of his claims, communicated the effects of that displeasure to all the labor of their hands, which profited them nothing. And, as the consecrated flesh of the sacrifices did not convey its sacredness to any objects beyond those immediately in the service, so all their external good works, even their offerings upon Gods altar, could not reach in its effects beyond the mere ceremonial fulfillment of outward observances, could riot secure those blessings which are the reward of living, operative holiness. The following verses (1517) now exhibit the condition of the people as proving the above illustration.

Hag 2:15. And now apply your heart, I pray you apply your heart. The people are bidden review their condition from the present time to the period preceding the resumption of the Temple. in such a connection of course means backward. The time when the work was resumed is specified here, because it was the turning-point in their fortunes. Their condition before that event is recalled for their contemplation that they might connect their distress then suffered with their unfaithfulness; and the brief period succeeding their return to obedience is included because they could not so soon recover from their embarrassments, no harvest having yet intervened. therefore serves a twofold purpose: (from) denotes that the retrospect should properly begin with the resumption of the work, and (before) indicates the direction in which the survey should extend. That it is the resumption of building that is referred to, and not the first feeble efforts of the returning exiles, is plain from the circumstances of the people to be described and the lesson to be enforced.

Hag 2:16. Since such things were. and there were (but) twenty. , literally: from these- things being (so). This means, from the time when affairs began to be in the condition referred to. It is clear that need not have the same reference here as in Hag 2:15, where it points backward. Here the people are not commanded to take a review of the past; the Prophet is now describing a certain state of affairs consequent upon their unfaithfulness. There it was a retrospect; here it is a view of cause and effect. The force of the verse is precisely that of Hag 1:9. The harvests did not fulfill expectation. Their actual yield did not even correspond to the appearance of the crops when gathered in. A heap of sheaves which seemed to contain twenty measures (it is best to supply , as E. V. does), was, when threshed, found to contain but ten. A quantity of grapes usually affording fifty purahs yields only twenty, is applied either to the press itself, or to the vat beneath into which the liquor flows. Here the latter is meant; after pressing, they went to draw from it, expecting the usual proportion of wine. , which in Isa 63:3 means a wine-press, must be used here of the vessel which was ordinarily employed to draw up the wine from the lower receptacle. It naturally came to be adopted as a convenient measure for such purposes, much in the same way as our bucket is sometimes referred to as a measure. The LXX. translating make it = (a bath). Such an ellipsis as E. V. assumes to exist in the original is incredible.

Hag 2:17. I have smitten you with blight saith Jehovah. The immediate cause of the shortness and inferior quality of the crops is now presented. On the connection between the first and second clauses, see Grammatical note. The people themselves are said to have been smitten, because the calamities specified fell upon their crops, the labor of their hands (comp. Virgils boumque labores), thus disappointing their nearest hopes. Compare, as exactly analogous, Hag 1:10-11. These passages further show that there is no need of rendering with E. V.: in all the labor of your hands. The last clause is difficult. Most take as a nominative, and supply (ye have not returned) after Amo 4:9, the former and latter parts of which passage present a resemblance to our verse probably fortuitous. But the cases in which accompanies a nominative are so rare that such a construction is not to be assumed except under exegetical distress. More admissible is the translation of the Vulgate, Itala, Umbreit, et al.: et non fuit in vobis qui reverteretur. To obtain this is supplied, and read. It ought not to be objected with Hitzig and Koehler, that does not mean among or in, but only beside or with; for 2Ki 9:25 furnishes an unmistakable instance of the former sense. The extent of the change involved in the Text is a more valid objection. It is better, with Maurer, Hitzig, Ewald, and Keil, to construe according to the principle laid down by Ewald ( 262 b), that (properly the construct of ), being usually followed by a verbal suffix, because containing a verbal conception (= there is not), here takes the sign of the object according to the construction after most verbs. We therefore render: but ye were not towards me, i.e., ye did not return to me. Hos 3:3, 2Ki 4:11, afford examples of such constructions.

Hag 2:18. Direct, I beseech you, your heartdirect your heart. This verse has received most diverse and in some instances most extraordinary interpretations. The main difficulty arises from the peculiar use of . Most of the English expositors adopt the rendering of E. V. without explanation, or (as Newcome) supply and instead of even before from, in order to make the contradiction involved appear slighter. Fausset thinks that the time is to be measured backward from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, and forward from the founding of the Temple, or that the same adverb, , can be taken indifferent senses when connected with the same verb, which is absurd. Indeed, it would seem very improbable that here should be employed in a sense different from that in which it occurs in Hag 2:15, as Eichhorn, Hitzig, Koehler, et al. assume that it must, in making it refer to the future. If now we could suppose, with the authors last named, and Pressel, that the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month was the day on which the foundation was laid, all difficulty would vanish. The people would again be directed to review their condition, and to contrast it with the blessings which they would henceforth receive, as described in the next verse. But the objections to this are insuperable: (1) The Temple was founded in the second year of Cyrus, fifteen years before (Ezr 3:10); and if we compare Ezr 4:4 with Ezr 4:23-24, we shall see that the work upon it was continued, however feebly, until within two years of the present prophecy, so that the foundation could not have fallen into decay. (2) Hag 2:3 implies that the new structure had then become somewhat advanced. If it were absolutely necessary to regard as = (from), we should be driven to conclude that the text, as it now stands, is corrupt. But the analogy of such words as (to a distance) (to the outside), shows that the meaning to or until21 is not impossible. So Rosenmller, Maurer, Ewald, Moore, et al., have understood it. This, it must be confessed, is a somewhat precarious resort; but it seems the only one at all defensible. The sense thus obtained for the whole verse is appropriate. In order to make the blessings to be announced in Hag 2:19 appear in strong contrast to the distress pictured in Hag 2:16-17, the Prophet repeats the injunction of Hag 2:15, but with a longer range of retrospect. The whole period back to the time when the foundation of the Temple was laid in the reign of Cyrus was one of more or less distress on account of the unfaithfulness of the people; for between that time and the present all the efforts that they had made to complete the work were spasmodic and feeble.

Hag 2:19. Is the grain yet in the barn I will bless. The parallelism and the connection show that is to be taken not in the sense of corn for sowing, but of corn already raised. The interrogation is equal to a strong negation. probably means here quoad, as to, in which sense it is of frequent occurrence. Maurer prefers to render: ad huc, as yet, a sense undeniable in Job 1:18; but there is no necessity of assuming such a rare usage here. The distress before described is brought nearer to the feelings of the people by the reminder that it was still present. They could then better appreciate the worth of the coming relief. From this day, must be taken in a somewhat loose sense, as denoting the beginning of that period of blessing which was to reward the obedience and devotion now displayed by the people. There is thus seen to be no inconsistency between the promise and the conditions described in Hag 2:15.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. The ceremonial institutes of the ancient Law were designed to illustrate mans relations to God as being under his favor or under his displeasure. The conditions and treatment of uncleanness, while setting forth most vividly the loathsomeness and defilement of sin, exhibited as clearly the effects of Gods anger against it, which was shown to extend to all the sinners experience, removing him beyond the reach of covenant mercies and blessings. While the divine displeasure was manifested towards an individual or a nation, no amount of outward religious observances could appease it, just as no frequency of contact with legally consecrated offerings could impart sacredness to any other object.

2. A return to God by his people under either Covenant has always been followed immediately by the bestowal of blessings peculiar to the Covenant. In Old Testament times a fullness of external mercies was chiefly expected and received. But before these blessings could, in the ordinary course of providence, be vouchsafed, spiritual and higher blessings were invariably imparted (see Hag 2:19)the assurance of Gods favor, the abiding presence and assistance of his Spirit. The New Covenant, while it has modified in form many of the provisions and conditions of the Old, is not superior to it in the certainty of its fulfillment; and nothing is better adapted to revive and strengthen our trust in Gods promises than a frequent recurrence to his dealings towards his ancient people.

HOMILETIONAL AND PRACTICAL

Hag 2:12-14. Our inward character, and not our privileges or associations or outward conduct, will determine Gods attitude toward us.

Calvin: Whoever intrudes external ceremonies on God, in order to pacify Him, trifles with Him most childishly. The fountain of good works is integrity of heart, and the purpose to obey God and consecrate the life to Him.Whatever we touch is polluted by us, unless there be purity of heart to sanctify our works.

Grotius: There are many ways of vice, but only one of virtue, and that a difficult one.

Fausset: Those who are unclean before God on account of dead works, thereby render unclean all their services.

Hag 2:15-17. Matthew Henry: When we take no care of Gods interests we cannot expect that He will take care of ours.

Moore: Men are inclined to assign any other cause for their sufferings than their sins, yet this is usually the true cause.Disappointment of our hopes on earth should make us lift our eyes to heaven to learn the reason.Affliction will harden the heart if it be not referred to God as its author.

Hag 2:18-19. Moore: Pondering over the past is often the best way of providing for the future.

Fausset: From the moment we unreservedly yield ourselves up to God, we may confidently calculate on his blessing.

Footnotes:

[12]Hag 2:11. is the direct and the indirect object.

[13]Hag 2:12.This verse contains a sentence virtually conditional, of which is the apodosis, and all that precedes the protasis. But as is properly an interjection the strict translation would be: Behold, let any one bear, etc. Some of the articles of food here mentioned are made definite, being considered severally as forming a distinct class. See Green, 245 d.

[14]Hag 2:13.For the construction of see the exegesis.

[15]Hag 2:16.. See Green, 267 d, and compare the exegesis.

[16]Hag 2:16. are used impersonally: one came, etc. These sentence are virtually conditional, marking the apodosis in each case.

[17]Hag 2:17. . This clause is in apposition to the object of the verb in the one preceding.

[18]Hag 2:17. . See the exegesis.

[19]Hag 2:19. agrees with the nearest subject and is understood with the others.

[20]Hag 2:19. is here used absolutely. There is no need of supplying an object.

[21] is not therefore pleonastic; it still marks the limits of the period specified, separating it from the preceding according to its original force.

Fuente: A Commentary on the Holy Scriptures, Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical by Lange

“In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD by Haggai the prophet, saying, (11) Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Ask now the priests concerning the law, saying, (12) If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No. (13) Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean. (14) Then answered Haggai, and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the LORD; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is unclean. (15) And now, I pray you, consider from this day and upward, from before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of the LORD: (16) Since those days were, when one came to an heap of twenty measures, there were but ten: when one came to the pressfat for to draw out fifty vessels out of the press, there were but twenty. (17) I smote you with blasting and with mildew and with hail in all the labours of your hands; yet ye turned not to me, saith the LORD. (18) Consider now from this day and upward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day that the foundation of the LORD’S temple was laid, consider it. (19) Is the seed yet in the barn? yea, as yet the vine, and the fig tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive tree, hath not brought forth: from this day will I bless you.”

Here is another of Haggai’s Sermons, and a most striking one it is. I humbly conceive, by the figure of uncleanness here spoken of, the Lord meant to set forth the polluted, and utterly lost state of our whole nature; and that the cleansing can only be in Christ. The smitings, blastings, and mildews, are figurative expressions of the sorrows, disappointments, and troubles, the consequence of sin. But, from the day the temple in Christ is founded, the whole face of things is changed. Temporal, spiritual, and eternal blessings, are with the Lord’s people. When God the Father comes to bless a soul in redemption by his dear Son, he blesseth him with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ Jesus. Eph 1:3 . Having Christ for our portion, we have all things in Christ, and with Christ; a portion to live upon in time, and to all eternity.

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

Hag 2:10 In the four and twentieth [day] of the ninth [month], in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD by Haggai the prophet, saying,

Ver. 10. In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius ] This diligence of the prophets in noting and noticing the precise time of God’s hand upon them, should teach us to do the like. See Trapp on “ Hag 1:1 “ The churches in Switzerland kept that day yearly as a holiday whereon the Reformation began among them (Scultet. Annal). Bugenhagius kept a feast every year on that day of the month wherein he and some other divines had finished the Dutch Bible, and called it The feast of the translation of the Bible (Melch. Adam in Vit. Bugenhag.). The University of Heidelberg kept an evangelical jubilee three whole days together, A. D. 1617, on the first of November, in the remembrance of the renowned Reformation of religion begun by Luther just a hundred years before. Hereby God s name shall be sanctified, our faith strengthened, and our good affection both evidenced and excited. By the time here described it appeareth that they had now been three months building, and the prophet meanwhile had given them great encouragement thereunto. But forasmuch as he found that they stuck in the bark, as they say, rested in the work done, thought they should therefore win upon God because they built him a temple, the prophet gives them to understand that there is more required of them than a temple, viz. that therein they worship the Lord purely and holily, in spirit and in truth; that their divine worship be right both quoad fontem et quoad finem, for principle and end of intention; for else they impure all that they touch, and are no whit better, but a great deal the worse for all their performances. This the prophet teacheth them in the two following oracles propounded by way of demand to the priests. How apt are men to lose themselves in a wilderness of duties! to dig for pearls in their own dunghills! to think to oblige God to themselves by their good works! to spin a thread of their own to climb up to heaven by! to rest in their own righteousness! to save themselves by riding on horses! Hos 14:8 . The prophet’s design is here to beat them off from such fond conceits; telling them that the person must be accepted ere the service can be regarded, as Abel’s. “To the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure, but even their mind and conscience is defiled,” saith the apostle, Tit 1:15 . Calvin upon this text saith no more; and yet Corn. a Lapide is very angry with him for saying so much. There is in Peter Lombard this golden sentence cited out of Augustine: The whole life of unbelievers is sin: neither is anything good without the chiefest good. This sentence Ambrose Ribera, a Popish expositor, censureth for harsh and cruel ( Crudelis est ills sententia ); but doth not God here say the same thing? Certain it is that good actions from bad men displease; as a man may speak good words, but we cannot hear, because of his stinking breath. “The sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to the Lord,” Pro 15:8 . Charity is nothing unless it flow out “of a pure heart, and of a good conscience, and of faith unfeigned,” 1Ti 1:5 .

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Hag 2:10-19

10On the twenty-fourth of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, the word of the LORD came to Haggai the prophet, saying, 11Thus says the LORD of hosts, ‘Ask now the priests for a ruling: 12’If a man carries holy meat in the fold of his garment, and touches bread with this fold, or cooked food, wine, oil, or any other food, will it become holy?’ And the priests answered, No. 13Then Haggai said, If one who is unclean from a corpse touches any of these, will the latter become unclean? And the priests answered, It will become unclean. 14Then Haggai said, ‘So is this people. And so is this nation before Me,’ declares the LORD, ‘and so is every work of their hands; and what they offer there is unclean. 15But now, do consider from this day onward: before one stone was placed on another in the temple of the LORD, 16from that time when one came to a grain heap of twenty measures, there would be only ten; and when one came to the wine vat to draw fifty measures, there would be only twenty. 17I smote you and every work of your hands with blasting wind, mildew and hail; yet you did not come back to Me,’ declares the LORD. 18’Do consider from this day onward, from the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month; from the day when the temple of the LORD was founded, consider: 19Is the seed still in the barn? Even including the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate and the olive tree, it has not borne fruit. Yet from this day on I will bless you.’

Hag 2:11-19 This is a very difficult passage to interpret. It seems to be a condemnation of the people’s selfish actions in stopping the work on the Temple. They were possibly relying on (1) the fact that they lived in the Holy Land; (2) that they were a part of the blessed ones, the remnant that returned; (3) that they were already offering sacrifices at the restored altar. However, this priestly parable shows that sin is passed on more readily than righteousness, and that just because they were in the Holy Land and offering sacrifices did not mean that God was pleased (cf. Hag 1:8). Their apathy in not rebuilding the Temple had affected every aspect of their lives. However, this was all over now because the reconstruction on the Temple had begun again.

Hag 2:11 The term ruling (BDB 435) is the Hebrew word torah, which the rabbis used to denote the writings of Moses (Genesis – Deuteronomy). The etymology of the word is uncertain.

1. from throw or shoot (BDB 435 I)

2. from teach (BDB 435 II, KB 436 III, also note 1710)

3. from Akkadian direction or order or instruction

The basic idea is instructions or directions. This word takes on theological significance when these guidelines come from YHWH.

In this context it refers to an opinion given by the priests about a particular question of clean vs. unclean. In context the whole passage is functioning as a parable (punch line, Hag 2:14, very similar to Isa 1:1-11 and Mal 1:6-14).

Hag 2:12 holy meat in the fold of his garment, and touches (cf. Exo 29:37; Eze 44:19; and Mat 23:19)

Hag 2:13 If one who is unclean from a corpse touches any of these (cf. Lev 22:4; Num 3:9; Num 19:2)

Hag 2:15

NASBfrom this day onward:

NKJVfrom this day forward:

NRSVfrom this day on

NJBtoday and henceforth

This is literally from this day and upwards (BDB 751, cf. Hag 2:18). This idiom usually refers to the future (e.g., 1Sa 16:13; 1Sa 30:25). Notice that NASB and NKJV put a colon after this phrase, while NIV puts a dash. This is an attempt to show that 15-17 form a unit somewhat unrelated to 15a.

The Septuagint, followed by the JPSOA, NEB, REB, and NET Bible, see the phrase as retroactive. However, there is no usage of this idiom in the Hebrew Bible which is used in this sense. This sense does not fit the idioms used in Hag 2:18.

Hag 2:15; Hag 2:18 There is a word play on consider (lit. set your heart) and one stone set on another. This wordplay (BDB 962, KB 1321) occurs in Hag 2:15 and Hag 2:18.

Hag 2:16-17; Hag 2:19 These verses speak of a divine judgment on Israel’s agriculture (cf. Hag 1:6; Hag 1:9-11).

Hag 2:16

NASBfrom that time

NKJVsince those days

NRSVhow did you fare

TEVyou would go to

NJBwhat state were you in

LXXwhat manner of men were you

REBhow were you then

The MT has since they were (BDB 224, KB 243, Qal INFINITIVE CONSTRUCT, NASB footnote). It is the LXX that has a question, which may reflect a different Hebrew manuscript. There are several Hebrew precursors to the Masoretic Text. This variety can be seen in the manuscripts from the Dead Sea Scrolls. Some follow the MT, some the LXX, and some neither. The MT was an attempt to standardize multiple manuscript traditions.

It is possible that the Hebrew word reflects an idiom, the exact meaning of which has been lost. Our only sure backup is context, context, context!

Hag 2:17 ‘Yet you did not come back to me,’ declares the LORD The purpose of the agricultural failures (cf. Amo 4:6-13, esp. Hag 2:9, which may be quoted here; an allusion to Deuteronomy 27-29) was to bring the covenant people back into a covenant relationship! Outward form was not enough (i.e., restored sacrificial system).

Hag 2:18 from this day forward This is the same difficult construction as Hag 2:16 (see notes), but here the context demands a forward look, as Hag 2:16 demanded a backward look.

Hag 2:19 from this day on I will bless you As they returned to YHWH with a whole heart, symbolized by their desire and actions, YHWH reversed the covenant curses. This blessing is first of all YHWH Himself and then the promised abundance of covenant fidelity (cf. Joe 2:14; Mal 3:10). See Special Topic: Blessing .

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley

In the, &c. Nearly two months after the preceding message. See note on p. 1276.

by. Many codices, with eight early printed editions, Septuagint, and Vulgate, read “unto”; but in Codex Hillel (quoted in the Massorah, App-30) and others, with two early printed editions, Aramaean, and Syriac, read “by the hand of”, as elsewhere in this book. See note on Hag 1:1.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

Hag 2:10-19

THE THIRD MESSAGE . . . Hag 2:10-19

THE 24TH DAY OF THE NINTH MONTH

Hag 2:10

The third message came from Jehovah to the prophet Haggai exactly three months after the favorable response of the people to the first message. As the first message cautions against false contentment and the second cautions against false discontentment, the third exhorts them not to build from false motives.

Zerr: Hag 2:10. About two months later than the preceding verse the Lord gave another message to the prophet. Inspiration is not a condition that is settled upon a man as if it were a part or his natural faculty. When God wished to have any revelation made known He would call the spokesman into the service and inform him just what he was to say. That is why we are told that “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2Pe 1:21)

Coffman: “In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of Jehovah by Haggai the prophet saying.” (Hag 2:10)

THIRD MESSAGE OF HAGGAI

Regarding this date, Dean wrote, “The ninth month is Chisleu, answering to parts of November and December.”[20] The message about to be introduced concerning the contrasting characteristics between holiness and defilement.

THUS SAITH THE LORD . . . Hag 2:11

As in the previous messages, so here, Haggai is careful to let his hearers know the message is not his but the Lords.

Zerr: Hag 2:11. The priests were the men who had supervision of the altar services and hence were acquainted with the requirements ot the law, The prophet was given the present message to them for the purpose of explaining wby the Lord was making his severe complaints against the nation.

Coffman: “Ask now the priests concerning the law…” (Hag 2:11) “The law” mentioned here is that contained in the Pentateuch and which long had existed in Israel as the supreme religious authority. The allegation that the prophet of God was here requesting the priests to make a new law is preposterous. Throughout the minor prophets, we have repeatedly found references to hundreds of specific provisions and requirements of God’s law as written in the Pentateuch; and there is no reasonable way to doubt that Haggai here was referring to that prior existing code of God’s laws. It is no embarrassment at all to us that many of the current liberal interpreters do indeed deny this. For example:

“The oral teaching of the priests was eventually incorporated in the Torah (the Pentateuch). Nothing can be proved from Haggai’s words as to the existence in his day of written code of laws. No exact parallel to the priests’ teaching here is to be found in the Torah.”[21]

ASK NOW THE PRIESTS CONCERNING THE LAW . . .

This admonition (Hag 2:12-14) is followed by two questions. The questions are, in essence, can the holy make the unholy holy and can the unholy make the holy unholy? The priests answers are accurate. To the first they answer no. To the second yes.

A basic principle is revealed here. The influence of holiness is not as far reaching as unholiness. A rotten apple will corrupt a barrel of good apples, but a good apple will not make a barrel of bad ones good.

So is this people. The construction of a holy temple will not automatically sanctify the land or its inhabitants any more than the flesh of a sacrifice will make holy a garment in which it is carried.

When the first temple stood, the people could not believe God would allow evil to come upon them. They made a fetish of the building. It must not happen again by assuming the work of re-building can sanctify an unclean people.

Here is a warning to todays Christian who assumes he is right with God because he associates with an active church, regardless of his personal commitment to God or trust in Jesus.

Zerr: Holy flesh (Hag 2:12) means that kind that had been selected and prepared tor tbe altar according to the demands of the law. But whIle holding that flesh in bis skirt before reaching the altar he comes in contact with these other articles that had n ot been consecrated. The priests admitted that it would render that flesh unholy. The ceremonial law regarded a dead body as unclean and everything that touched it was so (Hag 2:13). Even the people in general knew or had known that such was the stipulation in their instructions that came from the Lord through Moses. Having reminded them or the provisions concerning cleanness as they pertained to individual items of the service, Haggai makes comparison to the state of the nation (Hag 2:14). The services that were being attempted might have been legal in themselves, but tbe nation had come tn contact with that which was unclean which rendered the whole procedure unholy. (See note offered at Isa 1:10.)

Coffman: If one bear holy flesh in the skirt of his garment, and with his skirt do touch bread, or pottage, or wine, or oil, or any meat, shall it be holy? And the priests answered and said, No. Then said Haggai, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? And the priests answered and said, It shall be unclean. Then answered Haggai, and said, So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith the LORD; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer there is unclean. (Hag 2:12-14)

We reject out of hand the notion that we have in this so-called “pericope” a picture of the making of the Old Testament. Haggai did not say to the priests, make us a law about the situation mentioned; but “tell the people what the law is!” The exact passage of the Old Testament that carries the full and exact teaching of that enunciated by the priests in this interview is Num 19:11; Num 19:22, as follows:

“He that toucheth the dead body of any man shall be unclean seven days … and whosoever the unclean person toucheth shall be unclean.”

Apparently, some of the commentators are simply unaware of what God’s law surely contains. Despite the fact of the uncleanness in Numbers being a reference to uncleanness caused by a dead body; the principle would of necessity apply to all uncleanness. In fact, Num 19:22 makes precisely that application of it.

In this passage, we have discussed Hag 2:13 before Hag 2:12, because the priests’ answer regarding Hag 2:13 reveals the reason for their answer concerning Hag 2:12. The prophet, in fact, propounded two queries: (1) regarding a situation upon which the word of the Lord had provided no directive, and (2) regarding a situation that was most explicitly covered in the sacred law. In the second case, regarding the transferability, or contagiousness of defilement, their answer fully conformed to Num 19:11; Num 19:22, but in the first situation, regarding the same quality as applied to holiness, their answer conformed exactly to all situations where the Lord had not spoken; and they declined to make a law where God had not provided one. Only God had the right to declare anything “holy” or “defiled” regarding ceremonial uncleanness. Most of the Old Testament revelation regarding such things was very specific. That the priests consulted by Haggai in this passage had anything to do with what was incorporated into the Pentateuch is impossible to believe. What they commanded in case (2) was already covered. What they refused to allow as “holy” in case (1) was not specifically covered, except upon the premise that only those things God declares to be “holy” are actually so.

The lesson Haggai sought to bring out by this line of questioning was understood by Gill, as follows:

“A basic principle is revealed here. The influence of holiness is not as far-reaching as the influence of unholiness. A rotten apple will corrupt a barrel of good apples; but a good apple will not transform a barrel of rotten apples.”[22]

Haggai’s application of this principle to the returned Israelites was this: (1) they had erected an altar to God on the old location and had begun to build the temple. This was allowed to be “holiness.” Did that automatically entitle the whole people and the entire land to be counted “holy”? Despite that, it appears that many were expecting God to bless them far more than had been evident in the scanty harvests and hard times through which they were passing. The reason: the people had not really become “holy” through the token beginning they had made. (2) Israel, in the sense of the whole nation, “was utterly unclean (as in Hag 2:13) on account of its neglect of the house of the Lord, like a man who has become unclean through touching a corpse.”[23] This uncleanness would not be easily removed; and therefore the people must not complain of hard times and inconveniences; when they do better, God will more abundantly bless them! As Keil further explained, the teaching of this passage is preparatory to the prophet’s explanation of the crop-failures and the withholding of divine blessing. “Those things were the punishment of his people for their unfaithfulness (Hag 2:15-19).”[24]

Thus, Haggai applied the analogy we have already discussed under the previous verses. Yes, the altar they had erected upon the original site, in conformity to God’s law, was “holy”, but the sinful nation (continuing in their neglect of sacred duty) were unholy still, and, therefore, the very sacrifices they offered were themselves unholy through contamination by contact with the sinful nation. The sinful nation would have to make some changes before blessings could be bestowed.

CONSIDER . . . BACKWARD . . . Hag 2:15-17

Haggai challenges his people to consider what has happened since they returned from captivity, prior to the beginning of the reconstruction. Conditions have not changed since they began to build. Prosperity did not immediately result from their work on the temple. The reason was the far-reaching result of past neglect. It could not be erased by three months of obedience. In Hag 2:17 Haggai indicates that, although the people have resumed building, they have not really returned to the Lord. If they have, it is only recently. Here, just following their return from Babylon, is the beginning of the strange malady confronted by Jesus. This people honoreth me with their lips: but their heart is far from me. (Mat 15:8) Isaiah had confronted this same spiritual failure in the people prior to the captivity. (Isa 29:13) A building program such as that in which Haggais readers were engaged, or a full program of activity in the building, such as that in which Jesus hearers participated, can neither one substitute for genuine commitment to God and concern for His covenant purpose.

Zerr: Hag 2:15 asks them to take a view of their history going back to the time before any work had ever been done on the temple. The points he wishes to have them recall are those pertaining to their temporal disappointments (Hag 2:16). This subject was treated previous to this chapter as may be noticed in the comments on some earlier verse. They are reminded of the stubbornness that tbe nation manifested in spite of these chastisements from the Lord (Hag 2:17), which was the reason they had been doomed to spend a period in captivity under a foreign power.

Coffman: And now, I pray you, consider from this day and upward, from before a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of the LORD: (Hag 2:15)

“Consider from this day and backward …” This was a call for the people to look back over the past fourteen years of their shameful neglect of the principal purpose for which they had been allowed by the Father to return to their homeland, and to observe the stark lack of God’s blessing. He then proceeded to specify exactly what had been taking place. Why had not God blessed them? The whole nation was defiled through their long neglect of sacred duty and the two generations of contact with Babylonian paganism.

“Through all that time, when one came to a heap of twenty measures, there were but ten; when one came to the winevat to draw out fifty vessels, there were but twenty.” (Hag 2:16)

“Through all that time …” Through all the fourteen years after they had returned to Jerusalem to rebuild the Temple, and during which time they had utterly neglected it. Crops failed, expectations were not met; God did not bless them. So-called “modern man” is inclined to reject any view that connects his earthly success with concern for holy religion, but he is profoundly wrong in this. A broad view of the human race on earth clearly reveals that the people who have honored God enjoy degrees of earthly prosperity unmatched and even unapproached by anything visible in those lands where paganism still prevails. As long as a substantial proportion of a nation are God-fearing, honest, Christ-worshipping people, the land prospers, much of the prosperity spilling over to bless blatant and unrepentant sinners; but when the character of a whole nation is changed, the blessings of God are invariably withheld. Individually, therefore, there must be countless exceptions to the principle expounded by Haggai; but, as applied to nations, there are no historical exceptions to it. Godless Russia, possessing three fifths of the resources of the whole world today and unable to feed its population is a classical and current example.

“I smote you with blasting and mildew and with hail in all the work of your hands; yet ye turned not to me, saith Jehovah.” (Hag 2:17)

How does one view this? Could it be true that all they needed was some good fungicides and hail insurance? Well, how about the Med-fly in California this very day? We have plenty of fungicides and insecticides; and the point is that, no matter what men have, or fancy they have, they must also have the blessing of Almighty God in order to make it. Israel did not have it, and they were not making it!

CONSIDER . . . BACKWARD . . . Hag 2:18-19

Again Haggai calls upon the people to remember. A new era is about to begin, as indicated in verse fifteen by the transitional phrase and now. This seems to be the reason for Haggais repeated emphasis on dates. The term in Hebrew does not mean backward exactly, as our versions render it (Hag 2:15; Hag 2:18). It is used rather to call attention from the past to the future. Past calamities are contrasted with the beginning of the new period of Jewish history. The plea seems to be for patience. Since the laying of the first stones there has not been enough time for Jehovah to relieve the wants of the people short of a miracle. The fig and pomegranate and olive harvests are yet on the trees. Their present obedience will yet be rewarded.

Zerr: Hag 2:18. The prophet brings the re- view down to the present date. He reminds them that not only did the corruption of the past years cause them to be sent into captivity (Hag 2:19), but since that event their neglect of duty had brought about these shortages in their crops down to that very date. Notwithstanding all this, if they will begin NOW to serve the Lord faithfully, they will be blessed.

Coffman: “Consider, I pray you, from this day and backward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, since the day that the foundation of Jehovah’s temple was laid, consider it.” (Hag 2:18)

Although the disastrous conditions had continued right up until the very day the foundation of the temple was laid, and despite there hardly being enough seed in the granaries to sow the fields, Haggai will now pronounce an astounding blessing upon the people.

“Is the seed yet in the barn? yea, the vine, and the fig-tree, and the pomegranate, and the olive-tree have not brought forth; from this day will I bless you.” (Hag 2:19)

Some uncertainty exists regarding the meaning of this reference to seed in the barn, etc.; but it seems to be that Haggai is saying, “even if you do not have much to plant, and even if the trees and vineyards have been persistently unproductive, FROM THIS DAY, God will richly and overwhelmingly bless you!” Though there was no sign of leaf or fruit upon the trees, and hardly enough seed in the barn, nothing by which men could judge of the future abundance, “Yet the prophet predicts an abundant crop, dating from the people’s obedience.”[25]

Questions

Exposition of Haggai

1. Write an outline of Haggai.

2. Haggais first message is concerned with?

3. What were the results of the first message?

4. Discuss the ancestry of Zerubbabel in light of Hag 1:1, 1Ch 3:17-19, and Luk 3:27,

5. The message Haggai was _____________ message.

6. Haggais first message attacks _____________.

7. How does the message apply to us who would build the church?

8. How does Haggai account for the drought and austere conditions which had beset the people?

9. Discuss Jehovah stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel.

10. What is the gist of Haggais second message? To whom is it addressed?

11. What was missing from the second temple?

12. What is meant by the latter glory of the house?

13. Discuss Hag 2:7 in light of Heb 8:1 -ff and Gal 3:29.

14. What is meant by desire of all nations?

15. What is the gist of Haggais third message?

16. What false motives might have been involved in rebuilding the temple?

17. What malady confronting Haggai was also addressed by Jesus?

18. Show evidence that Haggai considered his message to be Gods rather than his own.

19. Discuss the shaking of the heavens and earth (Hag 2:21 cp. Hag 2:6)

20. Why could not this shaking have referred to the chaotic conditions of Darius early reign?

21. Where in the Bible do we find the ultimate fulfillment of this prophecy?

22. Discuss Zerubbabel as a type of Christ. Show parallels between them.

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

Gods Judgment upon the Nations

Hag 2:10-23

Two months after the foregoing prophecy, the prophet again remonstrated with the people for still neglecting the Temple, though they appear to have maintained religious rites. As the holy flesh did not sanctify what it touched, so religious observance did not compensate for neglecting the Temple; such neglect would make their service unclean, Hag 2:14. The earnest toils of the people had met with persistent unsuccess because God was against them, but from the moment of their repentance He would bless them, Hag 2:18-19. Amid all the upheavals described in Hag 2:7 the Jews would be preserved, and their safety guaranteed. Disturbances preceded the Saviors first advent, as they will the second; but amid the shaking and overthrowing that are ushering in the new era, let us not fear. All that cannot be shaken will remain; and as God remembered Noah amid the tossings of the deluge, He will care for us, not because of our deserts, but because of His grace. We did not choose Him, but He us.

Fuente: F.B. Meyer’s Through the Bible Commentary

CHAPTER 2:10-19

The Fourth Address

A few months later Haggai delivered another address of moral instruction and admonition. The question the prophet asks first is answered by the priests negatively. This is followed by a second question, If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these, shall it be unclean? This they answered affirmatively; for he that is defiled puts defilement upon everything he handles. When they had given the right answers, the prophet makes the moral application. So is this people, and so is this nation before me, saith Jehovah; and so is every work of their hands; and that which they offer thereon is unclean. All their works and offerings were unclean, because they were in that condition. They had to be cleansed first. Separation from evil, from that which defiles, was therefore demanded. So it is today. The order is cease to do evil and then learn to do well. We are, as Christians, no less exhorted to purge ourselves, to separate from evil, and then to become fit vessels for the Masters use.

And then the Lord challenges them to prove Him, to see if they separate from evil, are wholly for Him, how faithful He is going to be to them. From this day, the day of a true return to the Lord followed by obedience and separation, I will bless you.

Fuente: Gaebelein’s Annotated Bible (Commentary)

Hag 2:1, Hag 2:20, Hag 1:1, Hag 1:15

Reciprocal: Zec 1:1 – the eighth Zec 7:1 – the fourth

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

Hag 2:10. About two months later than the preceding verse the Lord gave another message to the prophet. Inspiration is not a condition that is settled upon a man as if it were a part or his natural faculty. When God wished to have any revelation made known He would call the spokesman into the service and inform him just what he was to say. That is why we are told that “holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2Pe 1:21).

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Hag 2:10-14. In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month At which time, as appears from Hag 2:16; Hag 2:19, (the materials being collected,) they began to go on again with the building of the temple. Ask now concerning the law What the law saith in this case. The question was put to the priests, whose office it was to put a difference between holy and unholy, between clean and unclean, Lev 10:10 : that is, to be thoroughly acquainted with all the ceremonial laws, and to instruct others concerning them. If one bear, or carry, holy flesh Part of the sacrifice, legally sanctified, or made holy, by the altar on which the whole was sanctified; in the skirt In the lap; of his garment Or in any other cloth; and if this cloth touch any common thing, as bread, &c., shall that become legally holy? And the priests said, No By the answer of the priests in this, compared with the following verse, we find, that legal holiness was not so easily communicated as legal impurity: for the holy flesh did not make any thing that was touched by it holy; but the touch of a person who was unclean rendered holy things unclean. Thus is vice much more easily contracted than virtue! Broad and easy is the way that leadeth to sin. but narrow and difficult is that which leads to holiness! Then said Haggai Now a second case is proposed; If one that is unclean by a dead body touch any of these Namely, the things mentioned in the former verse, bread, pottage, wine, &c.; shall it be unclean? Shall that which the unclean person doth touch become unclean? Though a touch of what is holy will not make holy, yet, will not a touch of what is polluted defile? and the priests answered, It shall be unclean The law was plain in this case: see Num 19:11. The least defect is sufficient to make a thing evil, whereas, to make it good and perfect, a concurrence of all good qualities is requisite. So is this people before me In like manner, saith God, your neglect of my temple, and your disregard of my worships have made you unclean, as if you had contracted legal pollution by touching a dead body; and rendered every thing you undertake, even the sacrifices you offer on my altar, unclean and unacceptable.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Hag 2:10-19. Haggais Sermon on Dec. 24.Haggai bases his exhortation on a pronouncement of the priests concerning the infecting power of holiness and uncleanness respectively. In the question put to the priests, holiness has its primitive sense of a physical state (i.e. taboo); but in the argument which Haggai bases on their answer a more spiritual sense of the word is intended. The law (Hag 2:11) is a mistranslation; render Ask now the priests concerning tomb. Torah (p. 121, Deu 1:5*, Pro 3:1*) means strictly instruction as to right and wrong, and though with the definite article it may mean the instruction par excellence, viz. the Law, it never loses its more general meaning. The priests are here asked for an opinion on a hitherto undecided point. Their answer brings out clearly a principle which Haggai develops, viz. whereas indirect contact with holiness does not make holy, direct contact with uncleanness does make unclean; and therefore since the nation has so little contact with holiness, and so much with uncleanness, the whole nation is unclean and the sacrifices which are offered are similarly infected. [Or the point may be that uncleanness has an intenser energy for infection than holiness; it can operate to two removes, holiness only to one. Uncleanness may be primary in persons or things, a dead body is unclean in itself; holiness can only be secondary, since the sole source of holiness is God. See pp. 202f.A. S. P.] But when the Temple is rebuiltit being implied that the Temple worship will be a greater factor in the life of the community than formerlythe sanctifying influence will outweigh the defiling, and with increased holiness will come an increase in welfare. The translation of Hag 2:15; Hag 2:18 is misleading, since the Heb. phrase from this day and upward always means from this day forward, as indeed it is rendered in 1Sa 16:13; 1Sa 30:25. The LXX rendering of the Heb. text unjustifiably translated through all that time is who were ye? We should, however, expect some such sense as how did ye fare? Hag 2:18 (except Consider, I pray you), should probably be omitted as an insertion founded on an incorrect inference from Hag 2:10; Hag 2:15. Hag 2:17 is a quotation or reminiscence of Amo 4:9, probably not by Haggai himself. In Hag 2:19 a question is out of place, a statement of fact being required; read (inserting one letter), Lo, the seed is still in the barn. Hag 2:15-19 may be paraphrased as follows: Take notice from this day forward, and observe how different your experiences in the future will be from those in the past. Before stone was laid on stone in the Temple (i.e. the Temple proper as distinct from the whole sanctuary called the house) you experienced disappointment; but henceforth all will be changed. At this time, mid-winter, the agricultural year is over, and agricultural operations are at a standstill. The seed to be sown is not yet taken out of the barn, and no yield of any sort is in sight. The increase in the fertility of the land which may be expected at the next ingathering will therefore have begun after the restoration of the Temple is taken in hand, and must be regarded as its direct outcome.

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible

III. A PROMISE OF FUTURE BLESSING FOR THE PEOPLE 2:10-19

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Another prophecy came from the Lord on the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month of 520 B.C. (Kislev 24, December 18). This date holds particular significance because it was on this day, five years later, that the temple was rededicated. The Jews celebrated this event with the Feast of Chanukah (lit. Dedication) and still do. During the two months between this prophecy and the former one (Hag 2:1-9), Zechariah began his ministry in Jerusalem (Zec 1:1).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

3. THE POWER OF THE UNCLEAN

{Hag 2:10-19}

Haggais third address to the people is based on a deliverance which he seeks from the priests. The Book of Deuteronomy had provided that, in all difficult cases not settled by its own code, the people shall seek a “deliverance” or “Torah” from the priests, “and shall observe to do according to the deliverance which the priests deliver to thee.” Both noun and verb, which may be thus literally translated, are also used for the completed and canonical Law in Israel, and they signify that in the time of the composition of the Book of Deuteronomy that Law was still regarded as in process of growth. So it is also in the time of Haggai: he does not consult a code of laws, nor asks the priests what the canon says, as, for instance, our Lord does with the question, “how readest thou?” But he begs them to give him a Torah or deliverance, based of course upon existing custom, but not yet committed to writing. For the history of the Law in Israel this is, therefore, a passage of great interest.

“On the twenty-fourth of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius, the word of Jehovah came to Haggai the prophet, saying: Thus saith Jehovah of Hosts, Ask, I pray, of the priests a deliverance, saying”:-

“If a man be carrying flesh that is holy in the skirt of his robe, and with his skirt touch bread or pottage or wine or oil or any food, shall the latter become holy? And the priests gave answer and said, No! And Haggai said, If one unclean by a corpse touch any of these, shall the latter become unclean? And the priests gave answer and said, It shall.”

That is to say, holiness which passed from the source to an object immediately in touch with the latter did not spread further; but pollution infected not only the person who came into contact with it, but whatever he touched.

“The flesh of the sacrifice hallowed whatever it should touch, but not further; but the human being who was defiled by touching a dead body, defiled all he might touch.” “And Haggai answered and said: So is this people, and so is this nation before Me-oracle of Jehovah-and so is all the work of their hands, and what they offer there”-at the altar erected on its old site-“is unclean.”

That is to say, while the Jews had expected their restored ritual to make them holy to the Lord, this had not been effective, while, on the contrary, their contact with sources of pollution had thoroughly polluted both themselves and their labor and their sacrifices. What these sources of pollution are is not explicitly stated, but Haggai, from his other messages, can only mean, either the peoples want of energy in building the Temple, or the unbuilt Temple itself Andree goes so far as to compare the latter with the corpse, whose touch, according to the priests, spreads infection through more than one degree. In any case Haggai means to illustrate and enforce the building of the Temple without delay; and meantime he takes one instance of the effect he has already spoken of, “the work of their hands,” and shows how it has been spoilt by their neglect and delay.

“And now, I pray, set your hearts backward from today, before stone was laid upon stone in the Temple of Jehovah: when one came to a heap of grain of twenty measures, and it had become ten, or went to the wine vat to draw fifty measures, and it had become twenty. I smote you with blasting and with withering, and with hail all the work of your hands, and – oracle of Jehovah. Lay now your hearts on the time before today (the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month), before the day of the foundation of the Temple of Jehovah-lay your hearts” to that time! “Is there yet any seed in the barn? And as yet the vine, the fig-tree, the pomegranate and the olive have not borne fruit. From this day I will bless thee.”

This then is the substance of the whole message. On the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, somewhere in our December, the Jews had been discouraged that their attempts to build the Temple, begun three months before, had not turned the tide of their misfortunes and produced prosperity in their agriculture. Haggai tells them, there is not yet time for the change to work. If contact with a holy thing has only a slight effect, but contact with an unclean thing has a much greater effect (Hag 2:11-13), then their attempts to build the Temple must have less good influence upon their condition than the bad influence of all their past devotion to themselves and their secular labors. That is why adversity still continues, but courage from this day on God will bless. The whole message is, therefore, opportune to the date at which it was delivered, and comes naturally on the back of Haggais previous oracles. Andrees reason for assigning it to another writer, on the ground of its breaking the connection, does not exist.

These poor colonists, in their hope deferred, were learning the old lesson, which humanity finds so hard to understand, that repentance and new-born zeal do not immediately work a change upon our material condition; but the natural consequences of sin often outweigh the influence of conversion, and though devoted to God and very industrious we may still be punished for a sinful past. Evil has an infectious power greater than that of holiness. Its effects are more extensive and lasting. It was no bit of casuistry which Haggai sought to illustrate by his appeal to the priests on the ceremonial law, but an ethical truth deeply embedded in human experience.

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary