6 8<\/strong>. First woe: the Chaldean lust of conquest<\/p>\n 6<\/strong>. Shall not all these<\/em> ] i.e. all the nations whom he has drawn into his net, and heaped together as his own possession.<\/p>\n take up a parable<\/em> ] The word may mean originally a saying containing a comparison or similitude; in a wider sense, a figurative speech or song. For the phrase “take up a parable” cf. Num 23:7<\/span>; Num 23:18<\/span>; Job 27:1<\/span>.<\/p>\n taunting proverb against him<\/em> ] Or, in regard to him<\/strong>. Taunting proverb<\/em> is lit. an enigma, riddles<\/em>, Pro 1:6<\/span>; Psa 49:4<\/span>; Dan 8:23<\/span>. Both words suggest a song or poem with concealed taunting allusions.<\/p>\n increaseth<\/em> that which is not his<\/em> ] The reference is to his insatiable lust of conquest and robbery of the nations.<\/p>\n that ladeth himself with thick clay<\/em> ] and that ladeth himself with pledges<\/strong>. That which he compels the nations to give him or takes from them by force is compared to pledges which he heaps up upon himself. The day will come when their restitution shall be exacted of him. Job 20:10<\/span>; Job 20:15<\/span>; Job 20:20<\/span>. The rendering “thick clay” is obtained by taking the word “pledges” as a compound; cf. Exo 19:9<\/span>, thick cloud<\/em>.<\/p>\n 6 20<\/strong>. Five woes pronounced against the Chaldean From the mouth of the nations whom he has desolated<\/p>\n Hab 2:5<\/span> does not belong to the vision Hab 2:4<\/em><\/span>, but forms the transition to the taunting proverb taken up against the Chaldean by the nations. This proverb is in the form of a prophecy in which woes are pronounced on the lust of conquest, rapacity, selfish pride and idolatry of the people, and their ruin is predicted, for their vices carry in them their own recompense. The woes are five in number, beginning with Hab 2:6<\/span>; Hab 2:9<\/span>; Hab 2:12<\/span>; Hab 2:15<\/span>; Hab 2:18<\/span>. Though the nations take up the woes, as the passage proceeds the prophet himself appears to speak.<\/p>\n Shall not all these take up a parable against him, and a taunting proverb against him? – <\/B>Nebuchadnezzar gathered, Dan 3:4-5<\/span>, all people, nations, and languages, to worship the golden image which he had set up. The second Babylon, pagan Rome, sought to blot out the very Christian Name; but mightier were the three children than the King of Babylon; mightier, virgins, martyrs, and children than Nero or Decius. These shall rejoice over Babylon, that, Rev 18:20<\/span>, God hath avenged them on her.<\/P> Woe to him that increaseth that which is not his! – <\/B>Truly wealth ill-gotten by fraud or oppression, is not his, who winneth it, before he had it, nor when he hath it, but a woe. It is not his; the woe is his. Woe unto him. He shall have no joy in what he gaineth, and what he hath he shall lose.<\/P> How long? – <\/B>What is the measure of thine impiety and greediness and cruelty? Yet if these are like hell, without measure, there remains another How long? How long will the forbearance of God endure thee, which thou art daily exhausting?<\/P> This is then the end of all. The conqueror sweeps to him all nations and gathereth to him all peoples. To what end? As one vast choir in one terrible varied chant of all those thousand thousand voices, to sing a dirge over him of the judgments of God which his ill-doings to them should bring upon him, a fivefold Woe, woe, woe, woe, woe! Woe for its rapacity! Woe for its covetousness! Woe for its oppression! Woe for its insolence to the conquered! Woe to it in its rebellion against God! It is a more measured rhythm than any besides in Holy Scripture; each of the fivefold woes comprised in three verses, four of them closing with the ground, because, for. The opening words carry the mind back to the fuller picture of Isaiah. But Isaiah sees Babylon as already overthrown; Habakkuk pronounces the words upon it, not by name, but as certainly to come, upon it and every like enemy of Gods kingdom. With each such fall, unto the end of all things, the glory of God is increased and made known. Having, for their own ends, been unconscious and even unwilling promoters of Gods end, they, when they had accomplished it, are themselves flung away. The pride of human ambition, when successful, boasts woe to the conquered. Since whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, the ungodly saying of the pagan is reversed, and it stands, Man sympathizes with the conquering side, God with the conquered. It is a terrible thought that people should have been the instruments of God, that they should, through ambition or other ends short of God, have promoted His ends which they thought not of, and then should be weighed in the balance and found wanting, and themselves be flung away.<\/P> Cyr: Gentiles also departed from their worship under Satan, and having deserted him who aforetime called them, ran unto Christ. For Satan gathered what was not his; but Christ received what was His. For, as God, He is Lord of all.<\/P> And to him that ladeth himself with thick clay – <\/B>It is the character of these proverbs to say much in few words, sometimes in one, and more than appears. So the word translated thick-clay, as if it were two words, in another way means in an intensive sense, a strong deep pledge. At best gold and silver are, as they have been called, red and white earth. Bern. Serm. 4. in Adv: What are gold and silver but red and white earth, which the error of man alone maketh, or accounteth precious? What are gems, but stones of the earth? What silk, but webs of worms? These he maketh heavy upon or against himself (so the words strictly mean). For He weigheth himself down with thick clay, who, by avarice multiplying earthly things, hems himself in by the oppressiveness of his own sin, imprisons and, as it were, buries the soul, and heaps up sin as he heaps up wealth. With toil they gather what is not worthless only, but is a burden upon the soul, weighing it down that it should not rise Heavenwards, but should be bowed down to Hell. And so in that other sense while, as a hard usurer, he heaps up the pledges of these whom he oppresses and impoverishes, and seems to increase his wealth, he does in truth increase against himself a strong pledge, whereby not others are debtors to him, but he is a debtor to Almighty God who careth for the oppressed Jer 17:11<\/span> He that gathereth riches had not by right, shall leave them in the midst of his days and at his end shall be a fool.<\/P> <\/p>\n Hab 2:6<\/span><\/p>\n Him that ladeth himself with thick clay.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n Heavy clay<\/strong><\/p>\n It is the glory of the religion of the Lord Jesus Christ when it is regarded in its moral aspect, that it is not the religion merely of transcendental and unpractical truths, but that its motives and precepts go down to the minutest details of everyday duty. Note–<\/p>\n 1. <\/strong>The danger of a false start and a false aim in life. God has given us a complex nature, and He has given us the use of our reason and the <\/strong>other faculties, physical and mental, which He bestows upon men. And the great end of man is to glorify God. If a man uses his powers only to found a family or amass wealth, we earnestly warn that man. He has mistaken the great end of his being.<\/p>\n 2. <\/strong>A form in which the lading of thick clay is found is greed of money. Covetousness in some one or other of its forms or specious disguises is one of the besetting idolatries of the day. This greed of money manifests itself in money-getting and in money-losing, and also in money-spending. Comparatively few recognise the principle of stewardship to God in the expenditure of their income.<\/p>\n 3. <\/strong>Another form in which this heavy clay is sometimes found is anxiety. What our Lord and His apostles tell us to avoid is the carking, distracting care which turns a mans mind away from God, and keeps him continually on the rack, forgetting the loving Father who is willing to be the bearer of all his cares.<\/p>\n 4. <\/strong>Another form of this clay among business men is sharp practice. Sharp practice is in our manufactories, upon the exchange, with lawyers, and not only among the little petty hucksters, but among tradesmen who make a much fairer show in our streets.<\/p>\n 5. <\/strong>Another form is a worldly tone and spirit. To be a Christian, there is no necessity to leave your work and to lead the life of a recluse. Go into the world and make your money, but do not worship it. (Canon Miller, D. D.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Under a heap of clay<\/strong><\/p>\n The avaricious accumulate on <\/strong>themselves thick clay. Hardly, indeed, an avaricious man can be found who is not a burden to himself, and to whom his wealth is not a source of trouble. Everyone who has accumulated much, when he comes to old age, is afraid to use what he has got, being ever solicitous lest he should lose anything; and then, as he thinks nothing is sufficient, the more he possesses the more grasping he becomes, and frugality is the name given to that sordid and, so to speak, that servile restraint within which the rich confine themselves. In short, when any one forms a judgment of all the avaricious of this world, and is himself free from all avarice, having a free and unbiassed mind, he will easily apprehend what the prophet says here,–that all the wealth of this world is nothing else but a heap of clay, as when any one puts himself of his own accord under a great heap which he had collected together. The general truth to be drawn from the expression is, that all the avaricious, the more they heap together, the more they lade themselves, and as it were, bury themselves under a great load. Riches acquired by frauds and plunders are nothing else than a heavy and cumbrous lump of earth; for God returns on the heads of those who thus seek to enrich themselves whatever they have plundered from others. Had they been contented with some moderate portion, they might have lived cheerfully and happily, as we see to be the case with all the godly, who, though they possess but little, are yet cheerful; for they live in hope, and know that their supplies are in Gods hands, and expect everything from His blessing. (John Calvin.<\/em>)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n Making money<\/strong><\/p>\n Whatever we do to please ourselves, and only for the sake of the pleasure, not for an ultimate object, is play, the pleasing thing, not the useful thing The first of all Enish games is making money. That is an all-absorbing game; and we knock each other down oftener in playing at that than at football or any other rougher sport; and it is absolutely without purpose. No one who engages heavily in that game ever knows why. Ask a great money-maker what he wants to do with his money; he never knows. He doesnt make it to do anything with it. He gets it only that he may get it. What will you make of what you have got? you ask. Well, Ill get more, he says. Just as at cricket you get more runs. Theres no use in the runs, but to get more of them than other people is the game. And theres no use in the money, but to have more of it than other people is the game. (John Ruskin.<\/em>)<\/p>\n Verse 6. Shall not all these take up a parable against him<\/B><\/I>] His ambition, derangement, and the final destruction of his mighty empire by the Persians, shall form the foundation of many sententious sayings<\/I> among the people. “He who towered so high, behold how low<\/I> he is fallen!” “He made himself a god; behold, he herds with the beasts<\/I> of the field!” “The disturber of the peace of the world is now a handful of dust<\/I>!”<\/P> <\/p>\n Shall not?<\/B> the prediction is moulded thus in a question, to give it emphasis, and make it more affective. <\/P> All these, <\/B>who have been oppressed, contumeliously used, and perfidiously deceived; all the people who have feared the power and policy of Babylon. <\/P> Take up a parable; <\/B>turn him and his state into a by-word and scorn. <\/P> Against him; <\/B>the king of Babylon, awhile since the terror, now the scorn of nations. <\/P> Taunting; <\/B>short, but smart, wounding scoffs; and whereas men usually bewail and condole the mishaps of great, brave, and just kings or kingdoms, all people shall exult and triumph in the miseries of this oppressive, luxurious, and base kingdom. <\/P> Woe!<\/B> either it is a threat of like vengeance on all such transgressors, or it may be a publishing the miseries come upon Babylon. <\/P> To him that increaseth; <\/B>by rapine, frauds, and injurious dealings multiplieth his treasures, as the king of Babylon did. <\/P> Not his; <\/B>it was not his though he had it; it was not his right though it was in his possession. Or else thus, one misery of the Babylonians shall be, they increase wealth, but not for themselves, but for the Medes and Persians. <\/P> How long?<\/B> this seems to be the sigh of the oppressed, who think it long ere the oppressor fall. <\/P> To him that ladeth himself; <\/B>woe to him that is a burden to others, while he burdens himself with amassed treasures gathered by extortion and grievous, unjust taxes! <\/P> With thick clay; <\/B>gold and silver, so called to lower the over-value of them, and perhaps to mind the tyrant of a clay-bed. <\/P> <\/p>\n 6. Shall not all these<\/B>the”nations” and “peoples” (Hab2:5<\/span>) “heaped unto him” by the Chaldean. <\/P> take up a parable<\/B>aderisive song. Habakkuk follows Isaiah (Isa14:4<\/span>) and Micah (Mic 2:4<\/span>) inthe phraseology. <\/P> against him<\/B>whendislodged from his former eminence. <\/P> Woe<\/B>The “derisivesong” here begins, and continues to the end of the chapter. Itis a symmetrical whole, and consists of five stanzas, the first threeconsisting of three verses each, the fourth of four verses, and thelast of two. Each stanza has its own subject, and all except the lastbegin with “Woe”; and all have a closing verse introducedwith “for,” “because,” or “but.” <\/P> how long?<\/B>how long<\/I>destined to retain his ill-gotten gains? But for a short time, as hisfall now proves [MAURER].”Covetousness is the greatest bane to men. For they who invadeothers’ goods, often lose even their own” [MENANDER].CALVIN makes “howlong?” to be the cry of those groaning under the Chaldeanoppression while it still lasted: How long shall such oppression bepermitted to continue? But it is plainly part of the derisivesong,<\/I> after the Chaldean tyranny had passed away. <\/P> ladeth himself with thickclay<\/B>namely, gold and silver dug out of the “clay,”of which they are a part. The covetous man in heaping them togetheris only lading himself with a clay burden, as he dares not enjoythem, and is always anxious about them. LEEand FULLER translate theHebrew<\/I> as a reduplicated single noun, and not two words, “anaccumulation of pledges” (De24:10-13<\/span>). The Chaldean is compared to a harsh usurer, and hisill-gotten treasures to heaps of pledges in the hands of a usurer.<\/P><\/p>\n Shall not all these take up a parable against him<\/strong>,…. A proverbial expression, a short sentence, a laconic speech, delivered in a few words, which contains much in them concerning the vices of these emperors, and imprecating judgments upon them for them; took up and expressed by the nations brought into subjection unto them, and especially by the Christians in those nations spoiled and persecuted by them:<\/p>\n and a taunting proverb against him<\/strong>; or, “whose explanation are riddles to him” y; the proverb, when explained, would be a riddle to him, which he could not understand, nor would give any credit to; taking it not to belong to him or them, and in which they had no concern; though afterwards would find they had, to their great mortification:<\/p>\n and say, Woe to him that increaseth [that which is] not his<\/strong>! substance or goods, not his own, as the Targum explains it; which they had no right unto, nor property in, but were another’s; and therefore guilty of great injustice in taking it from them, and might justly expect vengeance would pursue them for it; such were the goods they spoiled the Christians of for not worshipping their idols, and for professing and abiding by the Christian religion:<\/p>\n how long<\/strong>? that is, how long shall they go on increasing their substance by such unjust and unlawful methods? how long shall they keep that which they have so unjustly got? this suggests as if it was a long time, which, as Cocceius observes, does not so well agree with the Babylonian as the Roman empire, which stood much longer:<\/p>\n and to him that ladeth himself with thick clay<\/strong>: such is gold and silver, no other than yellow and white dust and dirt; and may be called clay, because dug out of the earth, as that; and as clay is defiling, so are gold and silver, when ill gotten, or ill used, or the heart set too much upon them; and as that is very ponderous and troublesome to carry, so an abundance of riches bring much care with them, and often are very troublesome to the owners of them, and frequently hinder their sleep, rest, and ease; and as clay when it sticks to the heels hinders walking, so riches, when the affections are too much set on them, are great obstacles in the way of true religion and godliness; hence our Lord observes, “how hard it is them, that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God”, Mr 10:24<\/span> they are even a weight, a clog to good men. The phrase seems to point at the meanness of them, as well as the hurt that sometimes comes by them, and the contempt they should be had in, in comparison of the true riches; hence, agreeable to this way of speaking, a good man Drusius makes mention of used to call gold “yellow earth”: and a certain Greek writer z says gold is ashes, and so is silver. The word used is a compound; and, as Kimchi observes, signifies an abundance of riches; but our countryman Mr. Fuller a chooses rather to render it an “abundance of pledges”; and thinks it has respect to the many pledges which the person here spoken of, by whom he supposes is meant the Babylonian monarch, had in an unjust manner took of several nations, and heaped up like an usurer; and which should in due time be taken from him, by those whom he had plundered of them: but this expresses the greedy desire of the Romans after money, as well as the unlawful methods they took to acquire wealth, and the vast sums they became masters of, so that they were even loaded with it; but, getting it in an unrighteous manner, it brought the curses and imprecations of the people upon them, especially those they defrauded of it. Joseph Kimchi, as his son David observes, interprets it,<\/p>\n “he shall make thick clay lie heavy on his grave;”<\/p>\n and it was a custom with the Romans, as Drusius b relates, that when one imprecated evil upon another, he used to wish a heavy load of earth upon him, that is, when he was dead; as, on the contrary, when one was wished well after death, it was desired he might have a light earth upon him: so Julian the emperor, speaking of Constantius, says c,<\/p>\n “when he is become happy, or departs out of this life, may the earth be light upon him;”<\/p>\n which is wishing all felicity, and freedom from punishment; whereas the contrary, to have a load of earth or thick clay, is an imprecation of the heaviest punishment.<\/p>\n y “et interpretationem aenigmata ei”, Drusius, Burkius; “et interpretatio erit aenigmata ipsi”, Cocceius; “cujus explicatio illi erit aenigmatum loco”, Van Till. z , , Naumachius apud Grotium in loc. a Miscel. Sacr. l. 5. c. 8. b Observat. l. 15. c. 18. c Epist. Hermogeni, Ep. 23. p. 141.<\/p>\n In Hab 2:6-20<\/span> the destruction of the Chaldaean, which has been already intimated in Hab 2:4<\/span>, Hab 2:5<\/span>, is announced in the form of a song composed of threatening sentences, which utters woes in five strophes consisting of three verses each: (1) upon the rapacity and plundering of the Chaldaean (Hab 2:6-8<\/span>); (2) upon his attempt to establish his dynasty firmly by means of force and cunning (Hab 2:9-11<\/span>); (3) upon his wicked ways of building (Hab 2:12-14<\/span>); (4) upon his base treatment of the subjugated nations (Hab 2:15-17<\/span>); and (5) upon his idolatry (Hab 2:18-20<\/span>). These five strophes are connected together, so as to form two larger divisions, by a refrain<\/em> which closes the first and fourth, as well as by the promise explanatory of the threat in which the third and fifth strophes terminate; of which two divisions the first threatens the judgment of retribution upon the insatiableness of the Chaldaean in three woes ( Hab 2:5<\/span><\/em>), and the second in two woes the judgment of retribution upon his pride. Throughout the whole of the threatening prophecy the Chaldaean nation is embraced, as in Hab 2:4<\/span>, Hab 2:5<\/span>, in the ideal person of its ruler.<\/p>\n (Note: The unity of the threatening prophecy, which is brought out in the clearest manner in this formal arrangement, has been torn in pieces in the most violent manner by Hitzig, through his assumption that the oracle of God includes no more than Hab 2:4-8<\/span>, and that a second part is appended to it in Hab 2:9-20<\/span>, in which the prophet expresses his own thoughts and feelings, first of all concerning king Jehoiakim (Hab 2:9-14<\/span>), and then concerning the Egyptians (Hab 2:15-20<\/span>). This hypothesis, of which Maurer observes quite correctly, Qua nulla unquam excogitata est infelicior <\/em>, rests upon nothing more than the dogmatic assumption, that there is no such thing as prophecy effected by supernatural causality, and therefore Habakkuk cannot have spoken of Nebuchadnezzar’s buildings before they were finished, or at any rate in progress. The two strophes in Hab 2:9-14<\/span> contain nothing whatever that would not apply most perfectly to the Chaldaean, or that is not covered by what precedes and follows (compare Hab 2:9<\/span><\/em> with 6 b<\/em> and 8 a<\/em>, and Hab 2:10<\/span> with 5 b<\/em> and 8 a<\/em>). “The strophe in Hab 2:9-11<\/span> contains the same fundamental thought as that expressed by Isaiah in Isa 14:12-14<\/span> respecting the Chaldaean, viz., the description of his pride, which manifests itself in ambitious edifices founded upon the ruins of the prosperity of strangers” (Delitzsch). The resemblance between the contents of this strophe and the woe pronounced upon Jehoiakim by Jeremiah in Jer 12:13-17<\/span> may be very simply explained from the fact that Jehoiakim, like the Chaldaean, was a tyrant who occupied himself with the erection of large state buildings and fortifications, whereas the extermination of many nations does not apply in any respect to Jehoiakim. Lastly, there is no plausible ground whatever for referring the last two strophes (Hab 2:15-20<\/span>) to the Egyptian, for the assertion that Habakkuk could not pass over the Egyptian in silence, unless he meant to confine himself to the Chaldaean, is a pure petitio principii <\/em>; and to any unprejudiced mind the allusion to the Chaldaean in this verse is placed beyond all possible doubt by Isa 14:8<\/span>, where the devastation of Lebanon is also attributed to him, just as it is in Hab 2:17<\/span> of our prophecy.)<\/p>\n Hab 2:6-8<\/span><\/p>\n Introduction of the ode and first strophe. – Hab 2:6<\/span>. “Will not all these lift up a proverb upon him, and a song, a riddle upon him? And men will say, Woe to him who increases what is not his own! For how long? and who loadeth himself with the burden of pledges.<\/em> Hab 2:7<\/span>. Will not thy biters rise up suddenly, and thy destroyers wake up, and thou wilt become booty to them?<\/em> Hab 2:8<\/span>. For thou hast plundered many nations, all the rest of the nations will plunder thee, for the blood of men and wickedness on the earth, the city, and all its inhabitants.” <\/em> is here, as everywhere else, equivalent to a confident assertion. “All these:” this evidently points back to “all nations” and “all people.” Nevertheless the nations as such, or in pleno<\/em>, are not meant, but simply the believers among them, who expect Jehovah to inflict judgment upon the Chaldaeans, and look forward to that judgment for the revelation of the glory of God. For the ode is prophetical in its nature, and is applicable to all times and all nations. Mashal <\/em> is a sententious poem, as in Mic 2:4<\/span> and Isa 14:4<\/span>, not a derisive song, for this subordinate meaning could only be derived from the context, as in Isa 14:4<\/span> for example; and there is nothing to suggest it here. So, again, m e ltsah <\/em> neither signifies a satirical song, nor an obscure enigmatical discourse, but, as Delitzsch has shown, from the first of the two primary meanings combined in the verb , lucere<\/em> and lascivire<\/em>, a brilliant oration, oratio splendida <\/em>, from which is used to denote an interpreter, so called, not from the obscurity of the speaking, but from his making the speech clear or intelligible. is in apposition to and , adding the more precise definition, that the sayings contain enigmas relating to him (the Chaldaean). The enigmatical feature comes out more especially in the double meaning of in Hab 2:6<\/span><\/em>, in Hab 2:7<\/span><\/em>, and in Hab 2:16<\/span><\/em>. serves, like elsewhere, as a direct introduction to the speech. The first woe applies to the insatiable rapacity of the Chaldaean. , who increases what does not belong to him, i.e., who seizes upon a large amount of the possessions of others. , for how long, sc. will he be able to do this with impunity; not “how long has he already done this” (Hitzig), for the words do not express exultation at the termination of the oppression, but are a sign appended to the woe, over the apparently interminable plunderings on the part of the Chaldaean. is also dependent upon hoi <\/em>, since the defined participle which stands at the head of the cry of woe is generally followed by participles undefined, as though the former regulated the whole (cf. Isa 5:20<\/span> and Isa 10:1<\/span>). At the same time, it might be taken as a simple declaration in itself, though still standing under the influence of the hoi <\/em>; in which case would have to be supplied in thought, like in Hab 2:10<\/span>. And even in this instance the sentence is not subordinate to the preceding one, as Luther follows Rashi in assuming (“and still only heaps much slime upon himself”); but is co-ordinate, as the parallelism of the clauses and the meaning of require. The . . is probably chosen on account of the resemblance in sound to , whilst it also covers an enigma or double entendre<\/em>. Being formed from (to give a pledge) by the repetition of the last radical, signifies the mass of pledges ( pignorum captorum copia <\/em>: Ges., Maurer, Delitzsch), not the load of guilt, either in a literal or a tropico-moral sense. The quantity of foreign property which the Chaldaean has accumulated is represented as a heavy mass of pledges, which he has taken from the nations like an unmerciful usurer (Deu 24:10<\/span>), to point to the fact that he will be compelled to disgorge them in due time. , to make heavy, i.e., to lay a heavy load upon a person. The word , however, might form two words so far as the sound is concerned: , cloud (i.e., mass) of dirt, which will cause his ruin as soon as it is discharged. This is the sense in which the Syriac has taken the word; and Jerome does the same, observing, considera quam eleganter multiplicatas divitias densum appellaverit lutum <\/em>, no doubt according to a Jewish tradition, since Kimchi, Rashi, and Ab. Ezra take the word as a composite one, and merely differ as to the explanation of . Grammatically considered, this explanation is indeed untenable, since the Hebrew language has formed no appellative nomina composita <\/em>; but the word is nevertheless enigmatical, because, when heard from the lips, it might be taken as two words, and understood in the sense indicated.<\/p>\n In Hab 2:7<\/span> the threatening hoi <\/em> is still further developed. Will not thy biters arise? = , those who bite thee. In the description here given of the enemy as savage vipers (cf. Jer 8:17<\/span>) there is also an enigmatical double entendre<\/em>, which Delitzsch has admirably interpreted thus: “ ,” he says, “pointed to (interest). The latter, favoured by the idea of the Chaldaean as an unmerciful usurer, which is concentrated in , points to , which is frequently connected with , and signifies usurious interest; and this again to the striking epithet , which is applied to those who have to inflict the divine retribution upon the Chaldaean. The prophet selected this to suggest the thought that there would come upon the Chaldaean those who would demand back with interest ( neshek <\/em>) the capital of which he had unrighteously taken possession, just as he had unmercifully taken the goods of the nations from them by usury and pawn.” , from , they will awake, viz., , those who shake or rouse thee up. , pilel<\/em> of , , is used in Arabic of the wind (to shake the tree); hence, as in this case, it was employed to denote shaking up or scaring away from a possession, as is often done, for example, by a creditor (Hitzig, Delitzsch). is an intensive plural.<\/p>\n So far as this threat applies to the Chaldaeans, it was executed by the Medes and Persians, who destroyed the Chaldaean empire. But the threat has a much more extensive application. This is evident, apart from other proofs, from Hab 2:8<\/span> itself, according to which the whole of the remnant of the nations is to inflict the retribution. Goym rabbm <\/em>, “many nations:” this is not to be taken as an antithesis to kol<\/em> – haggoym <\/em> (all nations) in Hab 2:5<\/span><\/em>, since “all nations” are simply many nations, as kol <\/em> is not to be taken in its absolute sense, but simply in a relative sense, as denoting all the nations that lie within the prophet’s horizon, as having entered the arena of history. Through , which is placed at the head of the concluding clause without a copula, the antithesis to is sharply brought out, and the idea of the righteous retaliation distinctly expressed. , the whole remnant of the nations, is not all the rest, with the exception of the one Chaldaean, for yether<\/em> always denotes the remnant which is left after the deduction of a portion; nor does it mean all the rest of the nations, who are spared and not subjugated, in distinction from the plundered and subjugated nations, as Hitzig with many others imagine, and in proof of which he adduces the fact that the overthrow of the Chaldaeans was effected by nations that had not been subdued. But, as Delitzsch has correctly observed, this view makes the prophet contradict not only himself, but the whole of the prophetic view of the world-wide dominion of Nebuchadnezzar. According to Hab 2:5<\/span><\/em>, the Chaldaean has grasped to himself the dominion over all nations, and consequently there cannot be any nations left that he has not plundered. Moreover, the Chaldaean, or Nebuchadnezzar as the head of the Chaldaean kingdom, appears in prophecy (Jer 27:7-8<\/span>), as he does in history (Dan 2:38<\/span>; 3:31; Dan 5:19<\/span>) throughout, as the ruler of the world in the highest sense, who has subjugated all nations and kingdoms round about, and compelled them to serve him. These nations include the Medes and Elamites (= Persians), to whom the future conquest of Babylon is attributed in Isa 13:17<\/span>; Isa 21:2<\/span>; Jer 51:11<\/span>, Jer 51:28<\/span>. They are both mentioned in Jer 25:25<\/span> among the nations, to whom the prophet is to reach the cup of wrath from the hand of Jehovah; and the kingdom of Elam especially is threatened in Jer 49:34<\/span>. with the destruction of its power, and dispersion to all four winds. In these two prophecies, indeed, Nebuchadnezzar is not expressly mentioned by name as the executor of the judgment of wrath; but in Jeremiah 25 this may plainly be inferred from the context, partly from the fact that, according to Jer 25:9<\/span>, Judah with its inhabitants, and all nations round about, are to be given into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, and partly from the fact that in the list of the nations enumerated in Jer 25:18-26<\/span><\/em> the king of Sesach (i.e., Babel) is mentioned as he who is to drink the cup “after them” ( Jer 25:26<\/span><\/em>). The expression ‘acharehem <\/em> (after them) shows very clearly that the judgment upon the nations previously mentioned, and therefore also upon the kings of Elam and Media, is to occur while the Chaldaean rule continues, i.e., is to be executed by the Chaldaeans. This may, in fact, be inferred, so far as the prophecy respecting Elam in Jer 49:34<\/span>. is concerned, from the circumstance that Jeremiah’s prophecies with regard to foreign nations in Jeremiah 46-51 are merely expansions of the summary announcement in Jer 25:19-26<\/span>, and is also confirmed by Eze 32:24<\/span>, inasmuch as Elam is mentioned there immediately after Asshur in the list of kings and nations that have sunk to the lower regions before Egypt. And if even this prophecy has a much wider meaning, like that concerning Elam in Jer 49:34<\/span>, and the elegy over Egypt, which Ezekiel strikes up, is expanded into a threatening prophecy concerning the heathen generally (see Kliefoth, Ezech.<\/em> p. 303), this further reference presupposes the historical fulfilment which the threatening words of prophecy have received through the judgment inflicted by the Chaldaeans upon all the nations mentioned, and has in this its real foundation and soil.<\/p>\n History also harmonizes with this prophetic announcement. The arguments adduced by Hvernick ( Daniel<\/em>, p. 547ff.) to prove that Nebuchadnezzar did not extend his conquests to Elam, and neither subdued this province nor Media, are not conclusive. The fact that after the fall of Nineveh the conquerors, Nabopolassar of Babylonia, and Cyaxares the king of Media, divided the fallen Assyrian kingdom between them, the former receiving the western provinces, and the latter the eastern, does not preclude the possibility of Nebuchadnezzar, the founder of the Chaldaean empire, having made war upon the Median kingdom, and brought it into subjection. There is no historical testimony, however, to the further assertion, that Nebuchadnezzar was only concerned to extend his kingdom towards the west, that his conquests were all of them in the lands situated there, and gave him so much to do that he could not possibly think of extending his eastern frontier. It is true that the opposite of this cannot be inferred from Strabo, xvi. 1, 18;<\/p>\n (Note: This passage is quoted by Hitzig ( Ezech.<\/em> p. 251) as a proof that Elam made war upon the Babylonians, and, indeed, judging from Jer 49:34<\/span>, an unsuccessful war. But Strabo speaks of a war between the Elymaeans (Elamites) and the Babylonians and Susians, which M. v. Niebuhr (p. 210) very properly assigns to the period of the alliance between Media (as possessor of Susa) and Babylon.)<\/p>\n but it may be inferred, as M. v. Niebuhr ( Gesch. Assurs<\/em>, pp. 211-12) has said, from the fact that according to Jeremiah 27 and 28, at the beginning of Zedekiah’s reign, and therefore not very long after Nebuchadnezzar had conquered Jerusalem in the time of Jehoiachin, and restored order in southern Syria in the most energetic manner, the kings of Edom, Moab, Ammon, Tyre, and Zidon, entered into negotiations with Zedekiah for a joint expedition against Nebuchadnezzar. M. v. Niebuhr infers from this that troublous times set in at that period for Nebuchadnezzar, and that this sudden change in the situation of affairs was connected with the death of Cyaxares, and leads to the conjecture that Nebuchadnezzar, who had sworn fealty to Cyaxares, refused at his death to do homage to his successor; for fidelity to a father-in-law, with whose help the kingdom was founded, would assume a very different character if it was renewed to his successor. Babel was too powerful to accept any such enfeoffment as this. And even if Nebuchadnezzar was not a vassal, there could not be a more suitable opportunity for war with Media than that afforded by a change of government, since kingdoms in the East are so easily shaken by the death of a great prince. And there certainly was no lack of inducement to enter upon a war with Media. Elam, for example, from its very situation, and on account of the restlessness of its inhabitants, must have been a constant apple of discord. This combination acquires extreme probability, partly from the fact that Jeremiah’s prophecy concerning Elam, in which that nation is threatened with the destruction of its power and dispersion to all four winds, was first uttered at the commencement of Zedekiah’s reign (Jer 49:34<\/span>), whereas the rest of his prophecies against foreign nations date from an earlier period, and that against Babel is the only one which falls later, namely, in the fourth year of Zedekiah (Jer 51:59<\/span>), which appears to point to the fact that at the commencement of Zedekiah’s reign things were brewing in Elam which might lead to his ruin. And it is favoured in part by the account in the book of Judith of a war between Nabuchodonosor (Nebuchadnezzar) and Media, which terminated victoriously according to the Rec. vulg.<\/em> in the twelfth year of his reign, since this account is hardly altogether a fictitious one. These prophetic and historical testimonies may be regarded as quite sufficient, considering the universally scanty accounts of the Chaldaean monarchy given by the Greeks and Romans, to warrant us in assuming without hesitation, as M. v. Niebuhr has done, that between the ninth and twentieth years of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign – namely, at the commencement of Zedekiah’s reign – the former had to make war not only with Elam, but with Media also, and that it is to this eastern war that we should have to attribute the commotion in Syria.<\/p>\n From all this we may see that there is no necessity to explain “all the remnant of the nations” as relating to the remainder of the nations that had not been subjugated, but that we may understand it as signifying the remnant of the nations plundered and subjugated by the Chaldaeans (as is done by the lxx, Theodoret, Delitzsch, and others), which is the only explanation in harmony with the usage of the language. For in Jos 23:12<\/span> yether haggoym <\/em> denotes the Canaanitish nations left after the war of extermination; and in Zec 14:2<\/span> yether haam <\/em> signifies the remnant of the nation left after the previous conquest of the city, and the carrying away of half its inhabitants. In Zep 2:9<\/span> yether goi <\/em> is synonymous with , and our is equivalent to in Eze 36:3-4<\/span>. : on account of the human blood unjustly shed, and on account of the wickedness on the earth ( chamas <\/em> with the Genesis obj. as in Joe 3:19<\/span> and Oba 1:10<\/span>). ‘Erets <\/em> without an article is not the holy land, but the earth generally; and so the city ( qiryah <\/em>, which is still dependent upon chamas <\/em>) is not Jerusalem, nor any one particular city, but, with indefinite generality, “cities.” The two clauses are parallel, cities and their inhabitants corresponding to men and the earth. The Chaldaean is depicted as one who gathers men and nations in his net (Hab 1:14-17<\/span>). And so in Jer 50:23<\/span> he is called a hammer of the whole earth, in Jer 51:7<\/span> a cup of reeling, and in Jer 51:25<\/span> the destroyer of the whole earth.<\/p>\n Now at length the Prophet denounces punishment on the Babylonian king and the Chaldeans; for the Lord would render them a sport to all. But some think that a punishment is also expressed in the preceding verse, such as awaits violent robbers, who devour the whole world. But I, on the contrary, think that the Prophet spoke before of proud cruelty, and simply showed what a destructive evil it is, being an insatiable cupidity; and now, as I have stated, he comes to its punishment; and he says first, that all the people who had been collected as it were into a heap, would take up a parable or a taunt, in order to scoff at the king of Babylon. When therefore the Chaldeans should possess the empire of almost the whole world, and subject to their power all their neighboring nations, all these would at length take up against them parables and taunts; and what would be said everywhere would be this— Woe to him who increases and enriches himself by things not his own. How long? that is, Is this to be perpetual? All then who thus increase themselves heap on themselves thick clay, by which they shall at last be overthrown. <\/p>\n With regard to the words, משל, meshil is a short saying or a pithy sentence, and worthy to be remembered, as we have noticed elsewhere. Some render it parable. As to the word מליצה, melitse, it probably signifies a scoff or a taunt, by which any one is reproved; for it comes from לוף, luts, which means to laugh at one or to deride him. It is indeed true, that the Hebrews call a rhetorician or an interpreter מליף, melits; and hence some render מליצה, melitse, interpretation; but it is not suitable to this passage; for the Prophet speaks here of taunts that would be cast against the king of Babylon. For as he had as with an open mouth swallowed up all, so also all would eagerly prick him with their goads, and disdainfully deride him. The word he afterwards adds חידות, chidut, is to be read, I have no doubt, in the genitive case. (32) I therefore do not approve of adding a copulative, as many do, and read thus—“a taunt and an enigma.” This word comes from the verb חוד, chud, which is to speak enigmatically; hence חידות, chidut, are enigmas, or metaphors, or obscure sentences; and we know that when we wish to touch a man to the quick, there is more sharpness when we use an obscure word, which contains a metaphor or ambiguity, or something of this kind. It is not therefore without reason that the Prophet calls taunts, enigmas, חידות, chidut, that is, obscure words, which bite or prick men sharply, as it were with goads. Hence in all scoffs a figurative language ought to be used; and except the expression be ambiguous or alliterative, or, in short, contain such metaphors as it is not necessary to recite here, there would be in it no beauty, no aptness. When therefore men wish to form biting taunts, they obscure what might be plainly said by some indirect metaphor; and this is the reason why the Prophet speaks here of a taunt that is enigmatical, for it is on that account more severe. <\/p>\n And he shall say. There is a change of number in this verb, but it does not obscure the sense. (33) The particle הוי may be rendered “woe”; or it may be an exclamation, as when one is attracted by some particular sight, caca or sus; and so it is taken often by the Hebrews, and the context seems to favor this meaning, for “woe” would be frigid. When the Prophets pronounce a curse on the wicked, it is no doubt a dreadful threat; but what is found here is a taunt, by which the whole world would deride those haughty tyrants who thought that they ought to have been worshipped as gods. He! they say, where is he who multiplies himself by what belongs to another? and then, How long is this to be? even such accumulate on themselves thick clay; that is, they sink themselves in deep caverns, and heap on themselves mountains, by which they become overwhelmed. We now understand the meaning of the Prophet’s words. <\/p>\n What seems here to be the singing of triumph before the victory is no matter of wonder; for our faith, as it is well known, depends not on the judgement of the flesh, nor regards what is openly evident; but it is a vision of hidden things, as it is called in Heb 11:1<\/span>, and the substance of things not seen. As then the firmness of faith is the same, though what it apprehends is remote, and as faith ceases not to see things hidden,—for through the mirror of God’s word it ascends above heaven and earth, and penetrates into the spiritual kingdom of God,—as faith, then, possesses a view so distant, it is not to be wondered that the Prophet here boldly triumphs over the Babylonians, and now prescribes a derisive song for all nations, that the proud, who had previously with so much cruelty exalted themselves, might be scoffed at and derided. <\/p>\n But were any to ask, whether it be right to assail even the wicked with scoffs and railleries, the question is unsuitable here; for the Prophet does not here refer to what is lawful for the faithful to do, but speaks only of what is commonly done by men: and we know that it is almost natural to men, that when those whom they had feared and dared not to blame as long as they were in power, are overthrown, they break forth against them not only with many complaints and accusations, but also with wanton rudeness. As, then, it usually happens, that all triumph over fallen tyrants, and throw forth their taunts, and all seek in this way to bite, the Prophet describes this regular course of things. It is not, however, to be doubted, but that he composed this song according to the nature of the case, when he says, that they were men who multiplied their own by what belonged to others; that is, that they gathered the wealth of others. It is indeed true, that many things are commonly spread abroad, for which there is no reason nor justice; but as some principles of equity and justice remain in the hearts of men, the consent of all nations is as it were the voice of nature, or the testimony of that equity which is engraven on the hearts of men, and which they can never obliterate. Such is the reason for this saying; for Habakkuk, by introducing the people as the speakers, propounded, as it were, the common law of nature, in which all agree; and that is,—that whosoever enriches himself by another’s wealth, shall at length fall, and that when one accumulates great riches, these will become like a heap to cover and overwhelm him. And if any one of us will consult his own mind, he will find that this is engraven on his very nature. <\/p>\n How, then, does it happen, that many should yet labor to get for themselves the wealth of others, and strive for nothing else through their whole life, but to spoil others that they may enrich themselves? It hence appears that men’s minds are deprived of reason by sottishness, whenever they thus addict themselves to unjust gain, or when they give themselves loose reins to commit frauds, robberies, and plunders. And thus we perceive that the Prophet had not without reason represented all the proud and the cruel as drunken. <\/p>\n Then follow the words, עד-מתי, od-mati, how long? This also is the dictate of nature; that is, that an end will some time be to unjust plunders, though God may not immediately check plunderers and wicked men, who proceed and effect their purposes by force and slaughters, and frauds and evil-doings. In the mean time the Prophet also intimates, that tyrants and their cruelty cannot be endured without great weariness and sorrow; for indignity on account of evil deeds kindles within the breasts of all, so that they become wearied when they see that wicked men are not soon restrained. Hence almost the whole world sound forth these words, How long, how long? When any one disturbs the whole world by his ambition and avarice, or everywhere commits plunders, or oppresses miserable nations,—when he distresses the innocent, all cry out, How long? And this cry, proceeding as it does from the feeling of nature and the dictate of justice, is at length heard by the Lord. For how comes it that all, being touched with weariness, cry out, How long? except that they know that this confusion of order and justice is not to be endured? And this feeling, is it not implanted in us by the Lord? It is then the same as though God heard himself, when he hears the cries and greenings of those who cannot bear injustice. <\/p>\n But let us in the meantime see that no one of us should have to say the same thing to himself, which he brings forward against others. For when any avaricious man proceeds through right or wrong, as they say, when an ambitious man, by unfair means, advances himself, we instantly cry, How long? and when any tyrant violently oppresses helpless men, we always say, How long? Though every one says this as to others, yet no one as to himself. Let us therefore take heed that, when we reprove injustice in others, we come without delay to ourselves, and be impartial judges. Self love so blinds us, that we seek to absolve ourselves from that fault which we freely condemn in others. In general things men are always more correct in their judgement, that is, in matters in which they themselves are not concerned; but as soon as they come to themselves, they become blind, and all rectitude vanishes, and all judgement is gone. Let us then know, that this song is set forth here by the Prophet, drawn, as it were, from the common feeling of nature, in order that every one of us may put a restraint on himself when he discharges the office of a judge in condemning others, and that he may also condemn himself, and restrain his desires, when he finds them advancing beyond just bounds. <\/p>\n We must also observe what he subjoins,—that the avaricious accumulate on themselves thick clay. This at first may appear incredible; but the subject itself plainly shows what the Prophet teaches here, provided our minds are not so blinded as not to see plain things. Hardly indeed an avaricious man can be found who is not a burden to himself, and to whom his wealth is not a source of trouble. Every one who has accumulated much, when he comes to old age, is afraid to use what he has got, being ever solicitous lest he should lose any thing; and then, as he thinks nothing is sufficient, the more he possesses the more grasping he becomes, and frugality is the name given to that sordid, and, so to speak, that servile restraint within which the rich confine themselves. In short, when any one forms a judgement of all the avaricious of this world, and is himself free from all avarice, having a free and unblessed mind, he will easily apprehend what the Prophet says here,—that all the wealth of this world is nothing else but a heap of clay, as when any one puts himself of his own accord under a great heap which he had collected together. <\/p>\n Some refer this to the walls of Babylon, which were built of baked bricks, as it is well known; but this is too farfetched. Others think that the Prophet speaks of the last end of us all; for they who possess the greatest riches, being at last thrown into the grave, are covered with earth: but this also is not suitable here, any more than when they apply it to Nebuchadnezzar, that is, to that sottishness by which he had inebriated himself almost through his whole life; or when others apply it to Belshazzar, his grandson, because when he drank from the sacred vessels of the temple, he uttered slanders and blasphemies against God. These explanations are by no means suitable; for the Prophet does not here speak of the person of the king alone, but, as it has been said, he, on the contrary, summons to judgement the whole nation, which had given itself up to plunders and frauds and other evil deeds. <\/p>\n Then a general truth is to be drawn from this expression that all the avaricious, the more they heap together, the more they lade themselves, and, as it were, bury themselves under a great load. Whence is this? Because riches, acquired by frauds and plunders, are nothing else than a heavy and cumbrous lump of earth: for God returns on the heads of those who thus seek to enrich themselves, whatever they have plundered from others. Had they been contented with some moderate portion, they might have lived cheerfully and happily, as we see to be the case with all the godly; who though they possess but little, are yet cheerful, for they live in hope, and know that their supplies are in God’s hand, and expect everything from his blessing. Hence, then, their cheerfulness, because they have no anxious fears. But they who inebriate themselves with riches, find that they carry a useless burden, under which they lie down, as it were, sunk and buried. <\/p>\n (32) This can hardly be allowed; for in this case the final letter of the previous word must have been [ ת ] and not [ ה ]. It is a word evidently in appostion, designing the character of the proverb and the taunt, they being enigmas, conveyed in a highly figurative language. The whole verse may be thus rendered— <\/p>\n Shall not these, all of them, Raise against him a proverb and a taunt — Enigmas for him; Yea, say will every one— “Woe to him who multiplies what is not his own! how long! “And to him who accumulates on himself thick clay!” <\/p>\n To render the last word [ עבטיט ], (or [ עב טיט ], apart, as given by ten MSS.,) “pledges,” as it is done by Newcome and Henderson, does not comport at all with the rest of the passage. The Septuagint favor the common explanation, and also the Vulgate, and most commentators.— Ed. <\/p>\n (33) It is rendered impersonally by Jerome “ et dicetur —and it shall be said.” Junius introduces a question, and supposed the just, who lives by faith to be referred to—“And shall not he, i.e., the just, say?” But Marckius considers that God is the speaker—“And he, i.e., God, shall say.” But the most obvious construction is, that each one of the nations previously mentioned is introduced as speaking—“ Unusquisque illorum —every one of them,” is understood, says Piscator. — Ed. <\/p>\n CRITICAL NOTES.] <\/strong><\/p>\n Hab. 2:6<\/span><\/strong>. These<\/strong>] nations and people (Hab. 2:4<\/span>). Parable]<\/strong> A derisive song (Isa. 14:4<\/span>; Mic. 2:4<\/span>), some; ode, given by others, enigmatical in character. Woes]<\/strong> fivefold given, a song raised by the oppressed over the fall of the oppressor. First woe<\/em>, ill-gotten gains. Increaseth]<\/strong> i.e.<\/em> seizes what does not belong to him. How long]<\/strong> will he do this with impunity? Ladeth]<\/strong> To make heavy by a weight or load upon one. Thick clay]<\/strong> (mass of dirt) Lit. a cloud of clay, which will cause her ruin. Many render a burden of pledges gained by usury<\/em>, taken by an unmerciful usurer, which he will be compelled to give up (Deu. 24:10<\/span>). <\/p>\nFuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Keil & Delitzsch Commentary on the Old Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n