Haggai

INTRODUCTION

1. Background

Everything in this brief prophecy hangs on this one imperative—build God’s house (1:8)! The setting reflects much of the history of Israel—the days of the tabernacle, the beginning of the monarchy under Samuel, David’s desire to build a dwelling for God, Solomon’s building the temple, its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar, and the returning exiles who began to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem in 538 B.C. More immediately the setting of 1:8 begins with the rise of Cyrus.

In 559 B.C., Cyrus was only the king of An-shan, a district in Elam. He joined with Nabonidus, a weak successor of Nebuchadnezzar, to conquer Ecbatana, the capital of Media, in 550. Cyrus broke with Nabonidus and turned against him to capture Babylon in 539. Nabonidus had lost support because of his disinterest in Marduk and other traditional Babylonian deities. He failed also in his effort to secure Egyptian help against Cyrus. On the other hand, Cyrus, respectful of all deities, was probably welcomed to Babylon by the priests of the religion so unpopular with Nabonidus.

Nabonidus, the fourth king after the death of Nebuchadnezzar in 562 B.C., himself died in 539, after a seven-year reign. Belshazzar, his son, had evidently been coregent; but in fulfillment of Da 5:25–28, he too died. Cyrus, who had been king of Media and Persia since 549, now brought Babylon under his control. In the following year he made his famous edict (see Ezr 1:2–4; 6:3b–5), allowing all peoples to return to their native lands. The peaceful surrender of Babylon is recorded in both the so-called Nabonidus Chronicle and the Cyrus Cylinder. Ezr 5:13–14 describes the effect of Cyrus’s decree on God’s people.

According to Ezr 5:16, the foundations of the temple were laid by Sheshbazzar and his company, and Ezr 3:2 tells how the leaders built the altar and began sacrificing burnt offerings. Obviously, however, the work was not completed eighteen years later. Otherwise Haggai would not have preached his sermons.

Why did the enthusiasm of God’s people wane? For one thing, during the seventy years in Babylon, most of the exiles had come to consider it their home (cf. Jer 29:5–7). Further, some may have been doing so well financially that they were reluctant to return to Jerusalem and face the dangers involved in rebuilding the temple. Those who did return in 538 B.C. were probably the poorer ones who had nothing to lose in such a venture.

The reconstruction project may have faltered also because of the unstable political situation that followed the death of Cyrus in 529 B.C. Cambyses came to the throne and reigned for seven years. His major accomplishment was bringing Egypt under Persian control. The passage of his armies through the land of Israel may have worked a hardship on the native population. Demands for food, water, clothing, and shelter may have greatly diminished the meager resources of a people engaged in a building project well beyond their means.

When Cambyses died in 522, there were several contestants for the throne; and one of them actually ruled for two months. He was the Pseudo-Smerdis, the real brother of Cambyses. In any event, Darius I, or Darius the Great, the son of a general named Hystaspes, became king and ruled until 486. He is the Darius of the book of Haggai. With him came the stability the Jews thought necessary for continuing the work on the temple. Even then it was the second year of his reign before Haggai appeared on the scene to stir them to action.

The biggest problem the returned exiles faced was the opposition from the Samaritans and others who lived in the land (cf. Ezr 4). At first the “enemies” offered to help build the temple, claiming that they had been sacrificing to God since the time of Esarhaddon, the Assyrian king whose policy of exchanging populations had brought them there. But Zerubbabel, Joshua (“Jeshua” in Ezra), and the other leaders declined the offer and insisted on doing the work themselves. This antagonized those who had offered to help, and they continued to hinder the reconstruction project. They even secured temporary restraining orders and frustrated the plans of the faithful Jews throughout the reign of Cyrus and down to the reign of Darius (Ezr 4:5). At this point Haggai and Zechariah, who prophesied to the Jews in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel (Ezr 5:1), came on the scene.

2. Authorship

Haggai is unknown to us apart from his short book, the two isolated occurrences of his name in Ezra (5:1; 6:14), and an allusion in Zec 8:9. The word “Haggai” seems to be an adjective from the Hebrew word for “feast,” and therefore the prophet’s name may mean “festal.” If the “i” (“y” in Hebrew) on the end suggests a shortened form of the name “Yahweh” (translated as “the LORD”), the prophet’s name would mean “Feast of Yahweh.”

If 2:3 indicates that Haggai saw Solomon’s temple before it was destroyed, then he must have been at least seventy years old at the time of his prophecy. Since he was usually linked with Zechariah, and since his name comes first, Haggai was probably the older of the two. It is likely that he had returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel eighteen years earlier (in 538).

The lists of returnees in the opening chapters of Ezra do not mention Haggai; and we know nothing of his ancestry. Nor is there any information about his occupation other than that he was a prophet. The brief record of his ministry shows him as a man of conviction. Unique among the prophets, he was listened to, and his words were obeyed. In a mere four years the temple was complete.

3. Date and Place of Origin

Haggai dates his prophecies with precision. Four specific dates are mentioned (cf. 1:1, 15; 2:1, 10, 20), ranging from August 29 to December 18, 520 B.C. Thus the ministry of Haggai lasted less than four months. He obviously wrote in Jerusalem. His book refers to the house of God (the temple in Jerusalem). The command to go to the nearby mountains to fetch wood for the construction of the temple clearly implies this setting (1:8). Since neither Babylonia nor the adjoining part of Assyria has mountains, these references must be understood as the mountains of Judea.

4. Occasion and Purpose

Depending on how one calculates them, the seventy years of captivity may or may not have been over in 520 B.C. The exile connected with the final destruction of Jerusalem was in 586 B.C. (2Ki 25:8–11). Seventy years from that date would have been 516 B.C. Perhaps Haggai saw that date fast approaching and went to work to convince the people to get on with rebuilding the temple.

The constant oppression of hostile neighbors must have had a debilitating effect on the outlook of those trying to build for God. Against these odds and in the midst of this despair, Haggai chided the people to resume the task enthusiastically taken up so many years ago and subsequently dropped. His message was simply, “Build God’s house.” To support his case he contended that recent crop failures (1:9) and drought (1:10–11) were God’s way of reminding them of their dependence on him.

Another of Haggai’s purposes was to remind the people of spiritual priorities: they were God’s kingdom on earth, the only witnesses to divine truth. If they proved faithless, it would damage God’s reputation. Haggai kept before them the fact that they were God’s representatives in the world.

5. Theological Values

Central to Haggai’s theology was the temple. In his time it was more significant than the palace, and his dealings were more with priests than with princes. The temple and Mount Zion on which it sat represented God’s dwelling on earth. Its destruction by Nebuchadnezzar amounted to the ultimate blasphemy. The only way to rectify this situation was to rebuild the temple.

Coupled with this concern for spiritual matters is Haggai’s criticism of personal wealth and comfort. The people had finished building their own houses but had let the program of reconstruction on God’s house lapse. Haggai was convinced that if the people expressed sincere devotion and obedient service to the Lord, the Lord would in turn bless them with better crops (see 2:10–19).

Of theological importance is the prophecy in 2:9. While this verse is nowhere quoted in the NT, most interpreters take it as a reference to the advent of the Messiah. The second temple was less sumptuous than Solomon’s; but because it was to become the scene of some of Christ’s ministry, it would actually have a greater glory than the first temple. The peace promised by the Lord in this prophecy would ultimately come through Christ.

EXPOSITION

I. A Call to Build the House of God (1:1–11)

1. Introduction (1:1–3)

1–3 These three verses introduce the book of Haggai, date the first oracle, and identify the addressees. The second year of King Darius was 520 B.C. The sixth month was Elul, and the first day of that month would be August 29, by modern reckoning.

The first message is addressed to “Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel” and “Joshua son of Jehozadak.” This is the Zerubbabel who led the exiles back to Judea; he was the grandson of Jehoiachin (Jeconiah in Mt 1:12). Zerubbabel was, then, an heir to the Davidic throne; and it is understandable that the magnanimous Cyrus and Darius should allow such a man to be the governor of the province of Judea.

“Joshua son of Jehozadak” is spelled “Jeshua son of Jozadak” in Ezr 3:2, 8, et al. Apparently he was a direct descendant of Aaron the Levite, the first high priest. Joshua was then the high priest, the holder of the highest office in the religious hierarchy.

The actual message of Haggai begins with a quotation. The people were claiming that the time had not yet come for the Lord’s house to be built. Exactly what lay behind this remark is not certain. Perhaps they thought that the seventy years of predicted captivity were not yet up and that they would be out of God’s will if they built the temple before those years were past. If they counted the captivity from 586 B.C., then only sixty-six years had passed. If, however, they counted from 605 B.C. (the first invasion of Nebuchadnezzar), then the time was well past.

A second explanation relates to the opposition of the local population, mostly Samaritans. Perhaps the returnees were saying that it was better to wait for more favorable times. In response to this, Haggai would have to say that the time is rarely just right to build the house of God—i.e., to do God’s work. We can never expect the cooperation of the enemy in a truly spiritual task. Verse 3 is the introductory formula to Haggai’s response to the people’s claim that he had just quoted.

2. Ordering Priorities (1:4–11)

4 A rhetorical question opens Haggai’s first sermon. A spiritual man might have answered, “No, it is not right that we live in paneled houses, while this house remains a ruin.” But the people had put their own comfort before the building of the temple.

The word translated “paneled” (GK 6211) raises some questions. It apparently refers to an overlay of some kind, in some cases definitely wood. But it may be plaster (cf. KJV). It refers to an added measure of comfort the people thought they could not afford for the house of God.

5–7 The Hebrew idiom “put your heart on your roads” is aptly phrased by NIV’s “Give careful thought to your ways.” Verse 6 is a biting accusation that may reflect a drought and consequent famine conditions. Haggai broke into a kind of synonymous parallel poetry at this verse. The five pairs say essentially the same thing—all your effort is in vain.

(1) Pictured first is a lean harvest. It is a vicious cycle if from the precious little harvest of one year one feels obligated to save even more of it for next year’s seed. Then if that next year is unproductive, the loss is even greater. Such was the desperate situation of these returned exiles.

(2) The next picture is of a person suffering from some disease where quantities of food fail to satisfy his needs. His metabolism somehow does not allow the food to be properly digested and turned into a healthy and strong body.

(3) The wine was so watery that it failed to provide the satisfaction and stimulus it ordinarily should. “Fill” (GK 8910) usually means inebriation. These people were unable to drown their sorrows because of the inadequate vintage.

(4) Their clothes were not sufficiently heavy to keep out the winter’s damp chill (cf. Isa 28:20).

(5) Somehow the people’s income failed to meet their expenses; money seemed to disappear through holes in their pockets. It is possible that inflation was working against solvency, as in our day.

All these figures speak of the hardship that befalls people who have not included the Lord in their plans and who are preoccupied with their own interests.

8 The first positive part of Haggai’s initial message begins with three imperatives: “Go up . . . bring down . . . and build.” The original temple was built with cedars from Lebanon (1Ki 5:5–6). It is uncertain whether this verse refers to the mountains far to the north or the lower but rugged hills around Jerusalem. The limited financial resources of the people would point to the more modest forests of the nearby hills. The reference to wood rather than stones may further indicate that only the interior work was left to be done. The two reasons the Lord gives for the people to obey and build the temple are that he may have pleasure and be honored in it. Proof of the people’s devotion will come as they actually put their faith to work and finish the Lord’s temple.

9 Agricultural and economic disaster result from God’s withdrawal of his blessing because of the people’s failure to do first of all what pleased him. The reference to God’s blowing away what they brought home probably suggests that in the harvest was much chaff. The kernels or grains of wheat were so insubstantial that they simply disappeared with the chaff in the winnowing process. The harvest was poor because each man was busy with his own house, and no one cared for the house of God.

10–11 The first message of the prophet concludes pursuing the theme of economic catastrophe as the price for unfaithfulness in regard to building God’s house. First, the heavens withheld their dew, and consequently the earth withheld its crops. Though ordinarily receiving more dew than the fields, even the mountains were denied it. Thus also the vineyards and olive orchards would be affected. Grain that supplied the staple bread, grapes that provided the basic beverage, and oil used for a number of things would all be in short supply. What a tragedy to have these three basic crops fail!

II. The People’s Positive Response (1:12–15)

12 This verse records the positive reaction of the two leaders and the people to Haggai’s initial sermon—they “obeyed” (GK 9048) and “feared” (GK 3707). The reason for this wholesome response was that the Lord had sent Haggai. Exactly what Haggai did to authenticate his message is unknown. Some charisma or ring of authority must have prompted this obedience and fear. A people who had been driven to their knees by the days of drought and famine would be all the more receptive to a word from God.

13–15 Haggai is named the “messenger” (GK 4855), and he brought this brief message from the Lord: “I am with you.” These words were comforting and encouraging to a people oppressed by enemies and depressed by failing crops. By his divine aid this poor rabble could reconstruct a magnificent temple, repulse their enemies, seek and receive aid from an unbelieving monarch, and see dry ground bring forth food. Verse 14 records the results of that brief but strong reassurance. The Lord stirred the spirits of the two leaders (Zerubbabel and Joshua) and of the people, and they began to work on the temple. The date indicates that hardly three weeks had passed from Haggai’s initial sermon to the people’s obedience to his orders.

III. The Promised Glory of the New House (2:1–9)

1. Encouragement to Zerubbabel (2:1–5)

1–2 The twenty-first day of Tishri would correspond to October 17. This, the third date-formula of the book, marks the beginning of the second major oracle. The addressees are Zerubbabel, Joshua, and the “remnant of the people.” “Remnant” (GK 8642) here means the population with the two leaders.

3–5 Verse 3 consists of three rhetorical questions. Some present may have been able to answer yes to the first question. They had seen the temple of Solomon in their childhood. They would have to be at least seventy years old because that temple was destroyed in 586 B.C., and Haggai was speaking some sixty-six years later (520 B.C.).

The next question addressed those who might have remembered Jerusalem before Nebuchadnezzar destroyed it. Their response may have been: “Although it certainly does not compare in opulence, it is the temple of the Lord, and we are happy to see it being built.” There was no way these relatively poor exiles could have matched the extravagances of Solomon with his professional craftsmen working with imported woods and huge quantities of gold.

The third question virtually puts the discouraging sentiments into the mouths of the audience. They were all thinking it, and now Haggai says it. The new is inferior to the old, and that fact, along with the other discouraging circumstances, had thoroughly depressed the people and stifled their initiative.

Having brought the very problem of discouragement into focus, Haggai next offered the divine antidote: “Be strong . . . be strong . . . be strong . . . and work. For I am with you.” The problem was essentially one of attitude. So the primary command was to take courage. When the people did that, the command to “work” would be fulfilled quite naturally. The most uplifting thing they could hear was that God was with them.

The message continues with a reminder that this is what God had covenanted with the people (v.5). After the reminder, the prophet gave the people a promise and a command: God’s Spirit would remain with them, and “Do not fear.” Undoubtedly fear gripped many returnees—fear that God had written an eternal “Ichabod” over Jerusalem, fear that no amount of praying or piety would induce him to bless them again, fear that the whole endeavor was in vain, fear that the political enemies would in fact win, fear that all was lost. Therefore the words of God through Haggai must have been a great source of strength and comfort.

2. The Glorious New House (2:6–9)

6–9 Verse 6 is the only verse in Haggai quoted in the NT (see Heb 12:26, 28–29); the author of Hebrews has made some interpretive comments on this verse. The first “shaking” took place at Mount Sinai, when God gave the law to Moses (Ex 19:16); the second shaking will come at the end of the world. But we who are in Christ have an unshakable kingdom. The expression “a little while” (GK 5071) could mean anything from days to millennia (cf. Ps 2:12, where the same word occurs in a similar context).

“The desire of all nations” is beautifully messianic, though most modern translations do not support it. The problem centers on the words “the desired . . . will come.” In Hebrew “desired” (GK 2775) is singular and “will come” is plural. Those who read “desired” as plural do not take the verse messianically but say that the “desired things” are the wealth of other nations brought to Jerusalem. They do not see the “desired one” as the Messiah. The reference to “glory” (GK 3883), however, tilts the interpretation toward a personal reference to the Messiah (cf. Isa 40:5; 60:1; Lk 2:32). But were the Gentile nations desiring him? Certainly the Gentiles who receive Christ as Savior view him as desirable. Can that, however, be said of them before their salvation? Despite this and other problems, a messianic view should not be wholly dismissed.

God’s claim that “the silver” and “the gold” are his may be a response to the fears of the people—they were economically destitute. The drought and consequent famine had forced them to dip deeply into their meager resources. Subsequently they found no funds for the temple project. To a people discouraged because the temple they were building was so inferior to the one the Babylonians had destroyed, God promised that the glory of the present house would be greater than the glory of the former house. Certainly it would be a different kind of glory, for there was no way that the actual building was grander. The second temple was to be honored by the presence of Christ, a divine presence quite different from the Shekinah of the OT (see comments on Ex 24:15–17)

The second promise is that God will grant peace to the place. In fact, there have been few periods of enduring political peace in Palestine from this time on. But since Christ is the Prince of Peace (Isa 9:6), this too is probably a reference to his work and ministry (Mt 12:6; Ro 5:1). These people were plagued by enemies without and discouragement within. The promise of peace, which they thought of first in political terms, was a comforting one indeed!

IV. Blessings on a Defiled People (2:10–19)

1. The Past Defilement (2:10–14)

10–12 Haggai’s third sermon came two months after the second: December 18, 520 B.C. The prophet asked, on behalf of the Lord, the priests a question about the law. Verse 11 introduces a hypothetical problem; v.12 states the question, which concerns second-degree contact of sacred meat with other food via the fold of a garment in which the meat is carried. The law spoke of the newly anointed altar’s power to sanctify whatever touches it (Ex 29:37; cf. Mt 23:19). Leviticus 6:27 declares that the meat of the sin offering has the same power of contagiousness. The question Haggai posed is whether this holiness could be twice transmitted. Does the consecrated meat consecrate the garment? Can the garment in turn consecrate other foods such as bread, broth, wine, and oil?

The priests did not believe that such consecration could be so passed on. Holiness is not catching. This is the answer Haggai wanted, because he wished to show the people that it is easier to fall into sin than it is to fall into righteousness.

13–14 The question here is not, Is holiness infectious? but, Is defilement infectious? Leviticus 22:4–6 supplies the background: Uncleanness is contagious (cf. Nu 19:11–16). So the priests correctly answered in the affirmative to Haggai’s question. The Lord declared, “So it is with this people and this nation.”

The selfish attitude of putting personal comforts first had spread throughout the repatriated community. The people had encouraged one another to build their own houses and to wait for more propitious times to work on rebuilding God’s house. When attitudes are wrong, nothing given to God is really acceptable. So whatever these people offered was defiled. From early times it was quite clear that God basically wanted hearts, not hands. He desired obedience rather than sacrifice.

2. The Future Blessing (2:15–19)

15–19 The third message of Haggai began with a twofold illustration: Is holiness or defilement contagious? Verse 15 begins the other half of the message, the required response of the audience. The building of the temple had begun twelve years earlier, but the prophet urged the people to review what the situation was before their initial response to his first message to get to work. This, then, is a promise passage. There has been a marked contrast between the past and the future. The turning point was the start of the rebuilding project.

In the days of their disobedience, lethargy, discouragement, and personal concern with selfish comforts, the people never had enough in the pantry or the barn to meet their needs. Instead, a person came to a silo or shed where he thought there was a pile of at least twenty “measures,” but he found only ten. The same was true of the wine vat (v.16). These disastrous harvests and disappointing crops were the ways God was reminding his people of their duty to him.

“From this day on” means the date of Haggai’s third message (cf. v.10). The mention of laying the foundation, however, poses a problem. First, Ezr 3:6, 10; 5:16 records that the foundation was laid about 537 B.C. Second, 1:1–15 indicates that the building was resumed three months earlier. Thus v.18 might be paraphrased: “From this day onward, the eighteenth of December, start thinking about how things have been for the last sixteen or eighteen years.” Their resumption of work on the temple was the turning point; Haggai calls attention to the marked difference in the productivity of the land and the general blessing of God on the people’s efforts.

Verse 19 focuses again on the barren years that had preceded their resumption of the temple (cf. v.16), evidently attributing them to God’s punishment for the people’s unconcern with the temple. There was, of course, no seed in the barn. The returned exiles were on the brink of agricultural disaster.

The very end of this little sermon contains this promise: “From this day on I will bless you.” In the past it was touch and go. While the people were putting themselves first, they suffered the agonies of drought and famine. But when they put the Lord first, they began to enjoy his blessing. This was merely one way God chose to remind the people of his sovereignty over them. He who was concerned with the temple was also in control of the rain.

V. Zerubbabel, the Lord’s Signet Ring (2:20–23)

20–23 The fourth oracle came on the same day as the preceding message. The words are directed to Zerubbabel alone. Haggai’s apocalyptic language points to a day in the distant future. God promises to overthrow and destroy Gentile dominions. The description is in familiar terms. Because of the cosmic language, many interpreters link these predictions to the final overthrow of all unregenerate nations at the end of the age, at the second coming of Christ.

God’s promise is expanded in v.23 to include Zerubbabel. Notice that he was called “my servant” (GK 6269). This was Isaiah’s favorite designation of the Messiah (Isa 41:8; 42:1; 49:5–6; 50:10; 52:13; 53:11). Also, “chosen” (GK 1047) recalls references to the chosen people and the chosen One from among those people (cf. 1Ki 11:13; 1Ch 28:4; Ne 9:7; et al.). This promise to Zerubbabel must be understood messianically, for the Persians simply would not tolerate a man laying claim to the promises here stated. Zerubbabel was no more the Messiah than Moses, Joshua, David, Solomon, or Isaiah. But Zerubbabel was in the genealogy of Christ (cf. Mt 1:12–13) and pointed forward to him.

The mention of “signet ring” (GK 2597) deserves special attention. In ancient times the signet ring corresponded to the crown, the throne, or the scepter. Ahab, the wicked king of Israel, had one that his even more wicked wife Jezebel used to seal a letter, framing the innocent Naboth (1Ki 21:8). Darius used such a ring to seal the decree concerning the lions’ den (Da 6:17). And King Xerxes also used such a ring to seal his decrees (Est 8:8). This token of authority would be granted to Zerubbabel much as it had been taken away from Jehoiachin king of Judah (cf. Jer 22:24 [Coniah]; cf. Mt 1:11–12). So Zerubbabel represents the resumption of the messianic line interrupted by the Exile, which had been ushered in by the unfortunate reign of three of Josiah’s sons.

So the book of Haggai, which began on such a discouraging and depressing note, ends on an uplifting and promising one. Haggai’s first message was one of indictment; his last one is of a great and blessed future for the people of God. As we now know, that future was much further away than either Haggai or Zerubbabel thought. But in the mind of God, it is as close and certain as tomorrow’s rising sun.

The Old Testament in the New

OT Text	NT Text	Subject
Hag 2:6	Heb 12:26	One more shaking