TEXT [Commentary]

  I.   First Message: Haggai’s Challenge to Covenant Renewal (1:1-15)

A.   The Call to Reconsider Priorities (1:1-6)

1 On August 29[*] of the second year of King Darius’s reign, the LORD gave a message through the prophet Haggai to Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and to Jeshua[*] son of Jehozadak, the high priest.

2 “This is what the LORD of Heaven’s Armies says: The people are saying, ‘The time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the LORD.’”

3 Then the LORD sent this message through the prophet Haggai: 4 “Why are you living in luxurious houses while my house lies in ruins? 5 This is what the LORD of Heaven’s Armies says: Look at what’s happening to you! 6 You have planted much but harvest little. You eat but are not satisfied. You drink but are still thirsty. You put on clothes but cannot keep warm. Your wages disappear as though you were putting them in pockets filled with holes!

NOTES

1:1 the LORD gave a message. Lit., “the word of the LORD came.” The combination of the verb “to be” (hayah [TH1961, ZH2118]) and the phrase “the word of the LORD” (debar-yhwh [TH1697/3068, ZH1821/3378]) constitutes the prophetic word formula. The formula introduces a report of a prophetic revelation in the oracular speech of the OT.

through. This preposition translates beyad [TH871.2/3027, ZH928/3338] (“by the hand of”) and denotes writing or speaking, a genitive of authorship (Waltke and O’Connor 1990:9.5.1c).

the prophet Haggai. The word nabi’ [TH5030, ZH5566] (prophet) designates Haggai as an emissary, one who speaks with the authority of the commissioning agent.

Jeshua. The MT actually gives the name “Joshua” throughout Haggai, of which “Jeshua” is a variant (also in 1:12, 14; 2:1, 4). Both names are derived from the Hebrew root yasha‘ [TH3467, ZH3828], which means “to save, deliver.” The NLT has opted to use the spelling “Jeshua” in Haggai (and elsewhere, e.g., Zech 3:3-9) to make a distinction between this high priest and the much earlier (and better known) leader of Israel by the same name, Joshua son of Nun (cf. Deut 31:1-8; Joshua).

1:2 This is what the LORD of Heaven’s Armies says. This Hebrew construction (koh ’amar [TH3541/559, ZH3907/606] yhwh tseba’oth) constitutes the messenger formula in prophetic speech and signifies the oral transmission of a message by a third party. The term suggests the divine assembly or council of the gods in ancient Near Eastern thought. The messenger of the council stands as an observer in council sessions and then reports what he has heard as an envoy of the council to others (cf. ABD 2.214-217).

LORD of Heaven’s Armies. This title for God is prominent in prophetic literature. It is Haggai’s favorite designation for God (found 14 times, 1:2, 5, 7, 9, 14; 2:4, 6, 7, 8, 9[2], 11, 23[2]). The expression is often understood as a construct-genitive: “the LORD of Hosts.” More precisely the construction is one of absolute nouns in apposition, perhaps conveying a verbal force: “Yahweh creates [angel] armies” (cf. TDOT 5.515). In either case, the epithet emphasizes “the invincible might behind the Lord’s commands” (Baldwin 1972:39).

the time has not yet come. The NLT follows the LXX here, perhaps understanding the noun “time” (‘eth, in the construction eth-bo’ [TH6256/935, ZH6961/995]) as the adverb “yet” (‘attah [TH6258, ZH6964], “now, yet”; cf. Baldwin 1972:39-40).

1:3 Then the LORD sent this message through. The repetition of the prophetic word formula and the genitive of authorship (see v. 1 above) underscore the importance and divine source of the message and the urgency of the hour.

1:4 Why . . . ? The rhetorical question is an emphatic device in prophetic literature requiring agreement with the expected answer to the question rather than a formal reply (Waltke and O’Connor 1990:40.3.b; cf. 2:3, 19 in MT).

luxurious houses. This understanding of the word sepunim [TH5603, ZH6211] (often rendered “paneled”) assumes that the contrast is between the elaborate homes of the people and the ruined Temple. Alternately, the contrast may be between the “finished” homes of the people and “the unfinished and thus unusable House of Yahweh” (Meyers and Meyers 1987:23).

ruins. The word khareb [TH2720, ZH2992] seems to be a deliberate echo of Jer 33:10-12, the promise of restoration for the “ruins” of Jerusalem.

1:5 Look at what’s happening to you! The repetition of this clause in the imperative mood (1:5, 7; 2:15) calls attention to the issue of volition or will—the people must choose to reflect and act upon the prophet’s message. The positive imperative further stresses the urgency of the hour and demands an immediate and specific response on the part of the addressee(s) (Waltke and O’Connor 1990:34.4a).

1:6 eat . . . drink . . . put on clothes. The form of the Hebrew verb used in each case is the infinitive absolute conveying continuous action (cf. The Message, “you keep filling your plates . . . you keep drinking and drinking . . . you put on layer after layer of clothes.”).

pockets filled with holes! Lit., “to a pierced bag,” a purse with holes. The image emphasizes the instantaneous loss of a portion of wages earned (cf. Meyers and Meyers 1987:26). It is unlikely that a laborer’s wages were paid in coinage at this early period. Baldwin (1972:41) suggests that the moneybag would have contained discs or wedges of copper, silver, or the like, approximately defined in value by weight.

COMMENTARY [Text]

Each of Haggai’s four messages includes a date formula assigning the speech to the precise day and month in the second year of King Darius’s rule over Persia. This practice has its precedent in the prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel (cf. Jer 1:2-3; Ezek 1:1). Unlike their preexilic predecessors, exilic prophets such as Jeremiah and Ezekiel were unable to consistently date their revelations according to the reigns of the kings of Israel and Judah. Instead, they keyed their oracles to the year of Babylonian exile. The prophet Jeremiah had indicated that this banishment from the land of promise for punishment of covenant violations would last 70 years (Jer 25:11; 29:10). The exilic year-date formula thus served as a “covenant time clock” of sorts, marking the duration of the curse of captivity and counting down (with anticipation and hope) toward the promised blessing of release and restoration (cf. Jer 52:31; Ezek 20:1).

The postexilic prophets Haggai and Zechariah dated their prophecies to exact dates during the days of Persian rule because earlier Isaiah foresaw the importance of King Cyrus and the Persians to the fortunes of elect Israel (Isa 45:1-13). It seems likely that both Haggai and Zechariah were also influenced by Ezekiel’s vision of the Temple (Ezek 40–48). The rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple was understood as the cornerstone event of the long-awaited messianic age. The chronological precision attached to their oracles served as an important reminder of Yahweh’s faithfulness to his covenant promises (Ps 111:9) and his good intentions to restore unified kingship in Israel under the prince of David (cf. Ezek 37:15-28).

Haggai’s audience had assumed that the time had not yet come to rebuild the Lord’s Temple (1:2). Apparently, the restoration community in Jerusalem was still struggling to establish itself politically and economically. The degree of self- sufficiency attained was understood to be sub-par, at least to the extent that the people calculated that it was unwise to siphon off already meager resources for the sake of investing in a high profile campaign like rebuilding Yahweh’s Temple. Haggai’s contemporary, Zechariah, also discerned that the real issue was one of self-interest when he proclaimed, “aren’t you eating and drinking just to please yourselves?” (Zech 7:6). The episode calls to mind the words of Jesus in the New Testament: “Seek the Kingdom of God above all else, and live righteously, and he will give you everything you need” (Matt 6:33).

Those who argued for fiscal responsibility knew that the realities of an economic recession meant it was no time to take on the funding of “special projects” (cf. Zech 8:10, “Before the work on the Temple began, there were no jobs and no money to hire people. . . . No traveler was safe.”). Yet Haggai knew, like Hosea, that “now is the time to seek the LORD” (Hos 10:12).

Implicit in Haggai’s rhetorical question that compares the “living quarters” of the people of Judah with those of their God (1:4) is the issue of priority in the stewardship and distribution of resources. The people of Haggai’s time consciously chose personal well-being over the well-being of God as manifest in the worship and service associated with his Temple. This pattern of attempting to satisfy religious obligations with half-hearted worship and second-rate offerings persisted into Malachi’s time with the presentation of inferior animal sacrifices (Mal 1:8). Haggai inferred that the things of God should be our highest priority and that God is worthy of the very best that we might offer him in worship and service. This is true simply because he alone is God (Isa 45:5-6). This is also true because as Creator, God “owns” everything anyway (Pss 24:1; 50:11-12). And this was especially true for the Hebrews because of the mandate to present “choice” or “best” samples of the agricultural firstfruits to God (Exod 23:19; 34:26). Ultimately, even the biblical injunction to offer God our best is but an external symbol of an internal reality. God is far more interested in our hearts than he is in receiving our “choice offerings” or even a “palatial abode” as a result of our labors. King David understood this when he said, “The sacrifice you desire is a broken spirit. You will not reject a broken and repentant heart, O God” (Ps 51:17). Likewise, the Apostle Paul urged the faithful to establish a similar spiritual platform for expressing devotion to God: “give your bodies to God because of all he has done for you. Let them be a living and holy sacrifice—the kind he will find acceptable” (Rom 12:1).

The Old Testament prophets often interpreted current events affecting the corporate life of the Israelites through the lens of covenant blessings and curses (cf. Deut 28). Haggai proves no exception, as he understood the calamity of drought (or perhaps blight, 1:6) as the hand of the Lord Almighty at work in the realm of nature (cf. Zech 10:1, “he makes the storm clouds”). The law of Moses forecasts just such a scenario for the people of Israel should they violate Yahweh’s covenant. The catalog of divine punishments for disobedience includes drought, such that “all your work will be for nothing” (Lev 26:19-20).

God’s intent in all of this was not capricious judgment for the purpose of destruction, since he affirmed he would not cancel his covenant with Israel (Lev 26:44-45). Instead, God would speak to his people through the economic circumstances of “supply and demand” in order to restore them to right relationship with himself. The poor standard of living experienced by the postexilic community (further eroded by inflation, cf. Mason 1977:16) was designed to instruct the people in the matter of priorities (cf. Verhoef 1987:57ff). Divine punishment may be disciplinary (sometimes severe but deserved), as Jeremiah recognized (Jer 30:11; 31:18). Haggai was also aware that on occasion God must discipline Israel like a father who must punish his wayward son, but always with love (cf. Jer 31:20; Heb 12:5-11).

Haggai’s call to rebuild the Temple of Yahweh should not be construed as some kind of “magical incantation” holding the promise of a remedy for the many problems facing the postexilic Hebrew community. God cannot be manipulated into showering material blessings upon his people because of the works of their hands (1:5-6; cf. Achtemeier 1986:98-99). Nor should Haggai’s message be viewed in contradiction to the words of warning pronounced by Jeremiah concerning misplaced trust in the physical structure of the Temple (Jer 7:4). Rather, Haggai summoned the people to the proper worship of God in contrast to blind faith in a “sacred building.”

The appropriate attitudes of reverence and humility and a genuine posture of obedience to the law of God identified explicitly in Zechariah (e.g., Zech 7:4-10) are implicit in Haggai. The prophet knew the “Temple theology” of King Solomon’s prayer of dedication—God does not dwell in houses made with human hands (1 Kgs 8:23ff). The prophet also knew the “worship theology” of his predecessors—God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Hos 6:6; Mic 6:8). Haggai understood that reviving the flow of God’s covenantal blessings to Israel was contingent upon the people’s careful and heartfelt obedience to the commandments of Yahweh’s covenant—not merely the rebuilding of the Jerusalem sanctuary (cf. Deut 28:1-2, 9, 13).