TEXT [Commentary]

black diamond   II.   The Doom of Nineveh Described (2:1–3:19)

A.   God, the Just Governor of the Nations (2:1-2)

1 [*]Your enemy is coming to crush you, Nineveh.

Man the ramparts! Watch the roads!

Prepare your defenses! Call out your forces!

2 Even though the destroyer has destroyed Judah,

the LORD will restore its honor.

Israel’s vine has been stripped of branches,

but he will restore its splendor.

NOTES

2:1 [2] enemy. The Hebrew term is more literally “scatterer.” The announcement of the advance of the “scatterer” provides a thought that is matched in 3:18-19 by the mention of the scattered refugees. The thought of destruction in 2:1-10 forms a literary link with 1:11-15 (esp. 1:14). Attempts to identify any one particular scatterer (e.g., Cyaxares the Mede, Nabopolassar, or Nebuchadnezzar) are pointless—the masculine singular participle being either the common collective singular or simply singular because the precise enemy was not further identified in Nahum’s predictive perception. If Nahum had been written after Nineveh’s destruction, as some critics affirm, more than likely the foe(s) would have been clearly designated. Conceivably, the “scatterer” could be the Lord himself (cf. Num 10:35; Ps 68:1; Jer 18:17).

Man the ramparts! Roberts (1991:57) suggests that the noun “ramparts” (metsurah [TH4694, ZH5193]) should be pointed matsarah [TH4712.1, ZH5211] (guard post), thus providing a cognate accusative with the verb natsar [TH5341, ZH5915]: “Man the guard post.”

2:2 [3] Israel’s vine has been stripped of branches. The NLT renders the resultant sense of the Hebrew text’s “plunderers have plundered . . . their [vine] branches.” The Hebrew verbal root connotes the thought of laying waste to something or some place. The vine was a well-known symbol of the covenant relation between God and Israel (Isa 5:1-7; Ezek 17; cf. Ps 80:8). Together with the fig tree, the vine was symbolic of God’s blessing his people (Hos 2:12; Amos 4:9; Mic 4:4). The evidence of his presence and blessings consisted in the fruitfulness of the vine. When the vine lay devastated by plague (e.g., Joel 1:4) or the invader’s heel (as here), it indicated God’s chastisement of his people. God used such means and symbols to bring his people to repentance and spiritual growth. With repentance and restoration would come renewed splendor and fruitfulness. For zemorah [TH2156, ZH2367] (branch), Cathcart (1973a:85-86) suggests a connection with Ugaritic dmr (protect), hence “soldiers.” Longman (1993:802) proposes the root zamar [TH2167, ZH2376] (sing), hence “songs.” The thought probably is “branches,” a synecdoche for the whole vine plant.

If Nahum prophesied during the reign of wicked Manasseh, the recent campaigns of Sennacherib and Esarhaddon would have been fresh in his memory as well as that of all Judah. Esarhaddon recorded that he summoned his vassal Manasseh to Nineveh: “And I summoned the kings of the Hittiteland [Syria] and [those] across the sea,—Ba’lu, king of Tyre, Manasseh, king of Judah. . . .” (see Luckenbill 1926:2.265). If Nahum’s prophecy dates from as late as Ashurbanipal’s later western campaigns (650–648 BC), his words would be all the more vivid.

restore its splendor. The noun ga’on [TH1347, ZH1454] is commonly translated “glory” or “splendor.” A negative connotation, “pride,” is sometimes attached to the noun (e.g., Prov 8:13; 16:18; Isa 16:6), but that seems unlikely here (contra Maier 1959:230-233). Rather, a repentant, redeemed Israel will be freed from exile and restored to its promised land to enjoy an era of peace and prosperity permeated by the glorious presence of her heavenly Redeemer. Attempts to emend the noun to gepen [TH1612, ZH1728] (vine) so as to form a parallel to “branches” (J. M. P. Smith 1911:305) are unnecessary.

COMMENTARY [Text]

The fate of plotting Nineveh (cf. 1:11-15) is carried forward in the announcement of the arrival of its attacker. In the light of this critical announcement, Nahum issues a fourfold command. Each of the imperatives is expressed asyndetically, thus producing a staccato effect and lending urgency and drama to the scene. Nahum’s admonitions are probably to be understood as sarcastic. The defenders are urged to make full preparations to secure the city’s defense. Because Nineveh’s doom had already been announced (ch 1), all such efforts were obviously destined for failure. Mighty Nineveh would be powerless before its assailants, despite any and all efforts to defend it.

Nahum’s announcement of the fall of Nineveh, despite its precautions, illustrates the old adage “Man proposes, God disposes.” In God’s time a “scatterer” would bring an end to this adversary of all nations. For Nineveh it would be the Chaldean Nebuchadnezzar II (605–562 BC), who would capture the Assyrian capital on behalf of his father, Nabopolassar, in 612 BC. Behind the movement of the Neo- Babylonian troops, however, stood an ultimate Scatterer, who as the Divine Warrior would use his human instruments to accomplish the purposes of his divine government. Such activities remind the believer of that climactic day when the last enemy will be subdued and the world will “become the Kingdom of our Lord and of his Christ, and he will reign forever and ever” (Rev 11:15).

In contrast to the Ninevites, God’s people would know the restoration and splendor that only a sovereign and beneficent God can give. Indeed, the prophets frequently predicted that God would yet “restore the fortunes” of his people (cf. Hos 6:11; Joel 3:1; Amos 9:14) in an era of renewed refreshment, prosperity, and happiness. The promise harks back to God’s people as heirs of the Abrahamic covenant (Gen 17:3-8; 22:17-18; 28:13-15). The realization of Israel’s full covenant blessings will find fulfillment in a great future day when the Glorious One (Isa 24:14-16) will dwell in the midst of his people (Ezek 48:35; Joel 3:17, 21), thus giving glory to his nation and land (cf. Deut 33:27-29; Isa 4:2; 60:15).