OT114

Introduction

Nahum is a short prophetic book specified in verse 1 as an oracle (maśśā’) from YHWH. This short book is a display of YHWH’s power over the Assyrians, the enemy of Judah. With impressive rhetoric, a dismayed Judah is challenged to imagine YHWH’s victory over their powerful oppressor (Wessels, 55–73). Very little is known about the author and his origin. Although Elkosh is designated as his town of origin, this place is unknown. Some regard Nahum as a cultic prophet or even a scribe, while still others focus on his poetic abilities. The prophet acted in the seventh century, but that is not necessarily the date of the completion of Nahum as a literary work. Very little detail is available from the book itself to determine a date. In Nahum 3:8–9, Thebes is mentioned, a city that was ransacked by Assyrian forces in 667 BCE. The other historical reference is the fall of Nineveh in 612 BCE. The book should most probably be dated after the fall of Nineveh in 612 BCE. The composition and unity of Nahum is also a contentious issue and has implications for the dating of the final text of the book (see Mason, 63, 74–75). Those who believe the book evolved over a long period of time would opt for a postexilic date for the final version of the document (see Roberts, 38–39; Schulz; O’Brien 2002, 14–15).

There are several views on the genre of Nahum. It has been treated, for example, as a prophetic liturgy (Coggins, 9–10), a prophetic refutation speech, a prophetic historical exemplum (Floyd, 18), a propagandistic anti-Assyrian tract, nonviolent resistance literature, a collection of songs of soldiers, and a type of city lament (see Huddlestun). A key characteristic that should be considered when analyzing Nahum is the poetic nature of the book with its use of rhetorical devices and imaginative language and images. The following literary units have been proposed for the discussion of the Nahum’s content: 1:1–15 [Heb. 1:9–2:1]; 2:1–13 [2:2–14]; 3:1–17; 18–19.

THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT

The oracles in Nahum concern Nineveh, symbol of power to the Assyrians. The dominance of Assyria forms the background of the discussion. Nineveh was situated on the eastern bank of the Tigris River near Mosul. Sennacherib (705–681 BCE) made Nineveh his capital, and it remained the capital under his successors Esarhaddon (680–669) and Ashurbanipal (668–627) (see Baker, 560–61). Nineveh was finally destroyed in 621 BCE by the Medes. As the enemy of Judah and Israel, Nineveh was also the enemy of YHWH.

Nahum 1:2–8 is a hymn about YHWH in the form of an incomplete acrostic. David Petersen (198) regards Nahum 1 as “a theological prolegomenon” to the book as a whole. The pericope concerns the nature and power of YHWH as the sovereign power. Three aspects of YHWH are highlighted in this short poem: First, his nature is described as jealous, avenging, slow to anger, and great in power (vv. 2–3a); second, his actions are emphasized (vv. 3b–6). His theophanic appearance affects nature and depicts his power. It is stated that his mighty presence will affect the wind, clouds, sea, rivers, and mountains. His enemies should take note of his sovereign power over nature and people. In the third instance, YHWH is presented as both protector of his people and destroyer of his enemies (vv. 7–8). On the one hand, he is described as good: a stronghold in times of trouble who knows the people who seek shelter in him. On the other hand, verse 8 states that he will annihilate his enemies and pursue them into darkness.

This poem serves the purpose of fostering trust in YHWH on the part of the people of Judah. The very nature of YHWH testifies to Judah that YHWH will counter the force of their powerful enemy Assyria. Nahum 1:9–15 reveals an alternating pattern of doom for Nineveh (1:9–11, 14; 2:1) and deliverance for Judah (1:12–13, 15 [Heb. 2:1]; 2:2). In verses 9–11, the people of Judah are assured that the unknown enemy’s plans will not succeed. Like fire devours thickets and stubble, so will the enemy be devoured. Nahum 1:12–13 confirms that YHWH’s acts will favor his people. The strong enemy will be destroyed. Images of a yoke being broken and a band snapped are used to depict the destruction of the enemy. The doom proclamation directed against the enemy in 1:14 entails a threat of total extinction: their name will be wiped out, images of their gods destroyed, and their death a sure reality. Verse 15 [Heb. 2:1] is an appeal to Judah to celebrate YHWH’s victory over the enemy and to show their loyalty to YHWH by keeping their vows.

THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION

The book of Nahum was interpreted and applied through the centuries by biblical authors and by proponents from the Jewish and Christian traditions. Scholars have referred to the relationship between the books of Jonah and Nahum. Both concern Nineveh and it inhabitants, but Klaas Spronk (16–17) is convinced that Jonah is a reaction to the uncompromising condemnation of the Assyrians in Nahum, leaving room for the possibility that the nations can also enjoy YHWH’s grace. There is also a correspondence between Nah. 1:15 and Isa. 52:7, both referring to the messenger motif, but there is no consensus among scholars on this literary correspondence.

It should be noted that the book of Nahum played an important role in the Qumran community. Fragments as well as interpretations of passages from Nahum testify to this (see 4QpNah [4Q169]). Some of the words from Nahum were regarded as relevant and therefore applied to the context within which this community lived (Coggins, 14). One example mentioned by Jin H. Han (20) is Nah. 1:4, which refers to YHWH’s power over the waters of the sea. According to the Qumran commentator, YHWH will release the same power against his enemies (4QpNah, fragments 1 and 2 cited in Berrin, 77). Furthermore, it seems that Nahum 1 had influence on some psalms of thanksgiving (Spronk, 16–17).

When it comes to the use of the book of Nahum in the Christian tradition, several of the church fathers applied aspects of it to their context and experiences. It is clear that Nineveh had become a symbol of all that is evil. Most of these fathers also interpreted the text of Nahum christologically. Huddlestun (106–7) refers to several such persons including Julian of Toledo, Haimo of Auxerre (Nahum 2—judgment of the devil and associates), Athanasius of Alexandria, and Tertullian (Nah. 1:4—referring to the calming of the sea by Jesus). Cyril of Alexandria (c. 375–444) should also be mentioned in this regard. He wrote a commentary on several of the prophets in which he tried to do justice to the historical setting of the text. In his commentary, he easily engages the society of Jesus’ time and speaks of Satan, the unholy scribes and Pharisees, and how Christ will crush rulers and authorities as is mentioned in Nahum 1 (Cyril of Alexandria, 292). There are several more such examples from Cyril’s commentary on Nahum, where he applies the text in similar fashion. An interesting example of the interpretive tradition of Nahum 1 is Origen’s interpretation of the phrase in Nah. 1:9, “no adversary will rise up twice.” According to Han (23), “Origen declares that the death penalty resolves guilt. For God does not exact justice from offenders twice” (Homilies on Leviticus 11.5). Nahum 1:15 has in particular attracted the attention of Christian interpreters because of the association of the “good news” with the gospel of Jesus Christ in the New Testament (see Rom. 10:15). For a detailed discussion of the interpretive tradition of Nahum, Han (6–30) has much more to offer than space allows here.

THE TEXT IN CONTEMPORARY DISCUSSION

The book of Nahum concerns the destruction of the enemy Assyria, emphasizing the sovereignty of YHWH as supreme power. Despite the criticism leveled against the book (see Mason, 57–58), most scholars have high regard for its literary quality and poetic brilliance. It employs metaphors, similes, rhetorical questions, repetitions, and numerous other stylistic devices to highlight the themes it wishes to convey. However, one can also appreciate the problems people experience when reading the book of Nahum. The content of the book raises serious theological issues, not the least of which are the following: How can such brutal and disturbing deeds, portrayed in the book of Nahum with regard to the fate of Nineveh, be ascribed to YHWH? Can YHWH be associated with such atrocious deeds? Nahum should be read as coming from a prophet/poet who has related his experience of oppression at the hands of the Assyrians to his understanding of YHWH. The poet/prophet is clear on this: YHWH alone possesses sovereign power and in exercising this power will counter and surpass the brutal force of the Assyrians. Contemporary interpreters should be careful to avoid a narrow “God is for us alone” theology and therefore should not lose sight of a more inclusive message of “God is for people.”

THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT

In Nahum 2:1–13 (Heb. 2:2–14), the focus is on the downfall of Nineveh. Although the city is not named in the early verses, it later becomes clear that the proclamation is aimed at the city. Verse 1 alerts Judah’s enemy of a scatterer that will pose a threat to them. This is followed in 2:1 by a word of encouragement that YHWH will restore his people. In the following verses, a scene is painted of a battlefield of which Judah is the spectator observing the downfall of the powerful Assyrian enemy. This is done in poetic style with skillful application of imagery and rhetoric. In 2:3–5, the siege of Nineveh is described, followed in 2:6–8 with scenes portraying the emotional impact of the carnage on the citizens in the city. The image of a flooded city is presented in verse 6. Verse 7 is difficult, but it seems that the Hebrew word huzzab should be understood as “it is decreed” that the inhabitants of the city will be carried away, slave girls lamenting the state of affairs of an empty city (Coggins, 41–42; Roberts, 65–66). According to verse 8, Nineveh is like a dam leaking water, a metaphor for power dwindling. In staccato style, the prophet describes the plundering of the wealth of the city (v. 9) and also the tragic consequences of defeat.

Devastation, desolation, and destruction!

Hearts faint and knees tremble,

all loins quake,

all faces grow pale! (Nah. 2:10)

Nahum 2:11–12 makes use of a lion metaphor to taunt the king of Assyria and the nobles because of their diminishing power. The chapter ends with a declaration that YHWH will totally destroy Nineveh and its leaders in war and leave Assyria powerless.

THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION

As already noted, the book of Nahum played an important role in the Qumran community (see 4QpNah). A Dead Sea fragment of Nah. 2:11–13 testifies to this. This passage refers to lions, interpreted by the Qumran commentary, according to some, as referring to Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–163) and probably Demetrius III (died in 88 BCE; Coggins, 15). Others seem to see in the reference to the lion an allusion to Alexander Janneus, who reigned from 103 to 27 BCE (Huddlestun, 106). The Nahum pesher is an invaluable source of information on the Maccabean period. The midrash associates the lion with Nebuchadnezzar, the monarch responsible for the exile (Exod. Rab. 29.9; Han, 29).

An interesting example of how some readers interpreted Nahum involves the issue of the “scatterer” mentioned in 2:1. The Septuagint offers the reading “one who breathes on your face.” In light of this translation, the church father Cyril of Jerusalem (c. 315–387) relates this to John 20:22–23, where Jesus breathes on the apostles to receive the Holy Spirit. This action according to Cyril represents the restoration of creation after the fall of Adam, when the first breathing of the Holy Spirit took place (see Han, 27). Later in history, there are examples others who made the Nahum text relevant to their time. Luther, for example, says that the “Assyrians perished because they were unable to use their prosperity moderately” (Spronk, 17), and arrives at the conclusion that the pope will similarly be destroyed (see Huddlestun, 107, for more on Luther’s interpretation of aspects of the Nahum text). Many interpreters regard Nineveh as synonymous with evil, and its defeat as the demise of evil itself.

THE TEXT IN ITS ANCIENT CONTEXT

Nahum 3 is subdivided between verses 1–17 and 18–19. Verses 1–17 can be further subdivided into two units: 1–7 and 8–17. This chapter describes the demise and downfall of Nineveh. Nahum 3:1–7 is a threat against Nineveh described as an evil city. Again, a scene of war and carnage is depicted showing the literary skill of the poet. What is striking is that YHWH is the antagonist of the adulterous city, announcing that Nineveh will be humiliated as a female. In verses 8–17, the defenselessness of Nineveh is the subject. The city Thebes was found not to be invincible; on what grounds, then, can Nineveh claim to be better than Thebes? Verse 12 employs the simile of a ripe fig to refer to Nineveh, shaken from a tree and falling into the mouth of an eater, meaning her enemy. The powerlessness of Nineveh’s army is again depicted by comparing its troops to women.

In the next verses, three media are mentioned that will cause Nineveh’s destruction: fire will devour the city, a sword will cut her off, and an enemy will invade the city as young locusts consume a field. The inhabitants of Nineveh can multiply like locusts, but this will still not prevent YHWH from destroying them. The last two verses of chapter 3 are addressed to the king of Assyria, informing him that he cannot rely on his officials to save the day. His situation is to be compared to an incurable wound; he can expect hardship in the future. This news will bring joy to people he had oppressed and who suffered as a result of his unceasingly evil actions.

THE TEXT IN THE INTERPRETIVE TRADITION

It is worth mentioning that there is possible influence of Nah. 3:8 on Rev. 17:2, which describes the whore of Babylon (Coggins, 14). There are also other instances of influence of Nahum 3 one can see in Rev. 18:3, 22, with its mention of sorcery (see Nah. 3:4); and in Rev. 17:6, with its allusion to Babylon as “drunken with blood” (see Nah. 3:1, 11). Both Nah. 3:1, 7, and Rev. 18:9–19 lament the burning of the city (Spronk, 113). The commentary on Nahum from Qumran regards the “city of blood” in Nah. 3:1 as “the city of Ephraim,” meaning “Jerusalem filled with treachery and lies by the Pharisees” and “Amon is Manasseh, that is, the Sadducees” (Spronk, 114). Jerome regards No-of-Amon (Nah. 3:8) as Alexandria, and Cyril interprets the “eater” of 3:13 as Satan. Even more extreme is Luther’s interpretation of Nah. 3:5 (“I will lift up your skirts over your face”) as the gospel revealing the prostitution of the pope (see Spronk, 114).