The Bible Commentaries and Others: Habakkuk, Book of

Habakkuk, Book of

HABAKKUK, BOOK OF. The eighth book of the Minor Prophets. Medieval and early modern exegetes derived the name from the Hebrew root ḥbq, “to embrace.” Most modern scholars follow Noth (IPN, 231), who derives it from Akk ḫabbaqūqū/ḫambaqūqū, which refers to a type of garden plant (AHW 1: 304).

———

A. The Prophet

B. Text and Versions

C. Literary Issues and Authorship

1. The Book as a Whole

2. The Pronouncement of Habakkuk

3. The Prayer of Habakkuk

D. Significance in Later Jewish and Christian Tradition

———

A. The Prophet

The book of Habakkuk provides little information concerning the identity and historical background of the prophet on whom it is based. He is identified simply as “Habakkuk the prophet” in 1:1 and 3:1 with no indication of his lineage, provenance, or dates. Consequently, a number of apocryphal traditions concerning Habakkuk appear in postbiblical literature. The apocryphal Bel and the Dragon (2d century b.c.e.) portrays him as a contemporary of Daniel during the Babylonian exile and identifies him as “Habakkuk, the son of Jesus, of the tribe of Levi” (Bel 1:1 = LXX Dan 14:1). The pseudepigraphic Lives of the Prophets (1st century c.e.) follows this dating but identifies him as a member of the tribe of Simeon ( Life of Habakkuk 1–9). The midrashic historical treatise Seder ˓Olam Rabbah (2d–3d century c.e.) places him in the reign of Manasseh (S. ˓Olam Rab. 20). Clement of Alexandria (2d–3d century c.e.) identifies him as a contemporary of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, but he also states that Jonah and Habakkuk are contemporaries of Daniel (Str. 1:21). Finally, the medieval kabbalistic commentary Sefer ha-Zohar (ca. 1300 c.e.) identifies him as the son of the Shunammite woman saved by the prophet Elisha (Zohar 1:7; 2:44–45).

Although most modern scholars reject these traditions as the product of later legend, the absence of personal information about Habakkuk continues to confound attempts to identify his historical background. A wide range of dates have been proposed, from Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah in the late 8th century (Betteridge 1903) to Alexander the Great’s conquest of the Near East in the 4th century (Duhm 1906; Torrey 1935). On the basis of Hab 1:6, which mentions the establishment of the Chaldeans, most contemporary scholars maintain that Habakkuk lived during the rise of the Neo-Babylonian Empire in the latter part of the 7th century, from the latter years of Josiah (640–609) to the reign of Jehoiakim (609–598) or perhaps Jehoiachin (598). A recent study by Haak (1986) maintains that Habakkuk was a pro-Babylonian supporter of King Jehoahaz, who was removed from the Judean throne and exiled to Egypt by Pharaoh Neco in 609. It should be kept in mind, however, that decisions concerning Habakkuk’s dates and the relation of his message to the historical events of his time are dependent on a literary assessment of the book and the identification of several key references including the “righteous” (1:4, 13; 2:4), the “wicked” (1:4, 13; 3:13), the subject of the “woe” oracles (2:6–20), and the Chaldeans (1:6). These issues will be discussed below.

The question of the prophet’s vocation is likewise dependent on the assessment of the book’s literary genre. Many scholars follow Mowinckel (1921–24: 3. 27–29), who argued that Habakkuk was a temple cult prophet on the basis of the liturgical forms found in the book (cf. Sellin KAT [1930]; Eaton TBC [1961]; Watts CBC [1975]; Széles ITC [1987]). This view is supported by Jeremias (1970: 103–7), who notes the parallels between Habakkuk’s watch station (2:1) and those of the postexilic Levites and priests in the Temple (Neh 13:30; 2 Chr 7:6; 8:14; 35:2; cf. Isa 21:8) as well as the temple context of the terms nābı̂˒, “prophet,” maśśā˒, “pronouncement” (RSV ‘oracle’), and ḥāzâ, “to see” (i.e., have a vision). A dissenting view sees Habakkuk as a visionary prophet without cultic connections (Rudolph KAT [1975]; Jöcken 1977). Others stress his wisdom background (Gowan 1968, 1976; Uffenheimer 1987) or his concern as an individual with the troubling events of his day (Keller CAT [1971]; 1973). Finally, a number of scholars note his connections with the Isaiah tradition (Brownlee 1971; Janzen 1982; Peckham 1986).

B. Text and Versions

The text of Habakkuk presents scholars with a number of problematic readings, not only because of the difficulties presented by the MT, but also because of the many variant readings found in ancient manuscripts and versions. Consequently, many scholars consider the MT of Habakkuk to be quite corrupt (e.g., Delcor 1961: 399). Earlier scholars generally assumed that these manuscripts and versions represented variant Hebrew originals and corrected the MT accordingly (Lachmann 1932; Good 1958). Recent advances in text-critical methodology which emphasize the interpretative character and intent of many text witnesses call this judgment into question (Sanders 1979). At present the issue is divided; some studies show great confidence in the MT (e.g., Haak 1986), whereas others rely heavily on textual emendation (e.g., Hiebert 1986).

A critical edition of the MT appears in BHS. This edition contains notes concerning the various medieval Masoretic mss and other textual versions. In addition to the Masoretic mss, the principal Hebrew, Greek, and Aramaic text witnesses are as follows:

The Habakkuk Pesher from Qumran (1QpHab) (Burrows, Trever, and Brownlee 1950; Trever 1972) dates to the 1st century b.c.e. and contains the text of Habakkuk 1–2 together with a commentary that interprets Habakkuk in relation to the early history of the Qumran sect. The text was thoroughly studied by Brownlee (1959), who examined over 160 variants from the MT. Most were minor orthographic, grammatical, and spelling changes or Aramaicisms which had crept into the text. There were a number of substantial changes, however, including wyśm for wĕ‚āšēm, “guilty men,” in 1:11; ḥrbw for ḥermô, “his net,” in 1:17; hwn wbgd for hayyayin bôgēd (RSV: “wine is treacherous”) in 2:5; mw˓dyhm for mĕ˓ôrêhem, “their shame,” in 2:15.

The Scroll of the Minor Prophets from Wâdı̄ Murabba˓at (Mur 88) dates to the 2d century c.e., some decades after the fixing of the Textus Receptus. Within its text of the Minor Prophets, it contains Hab 1:3–2:11 and 2:18–3:19. Apart from orthographic changes, there are a few variant readings or corrections. Most notable is the substitution of zrmw mym ˓bwt from Ps 77:18 for zerem mayim ˓ābār (“the raging waters swept on”) in Hab 3:10.

The LXX and other Greek versions (Aquila, Theodotion, Symmachus) are represented in a critical edition (by J. Ziegler 1943) of the Greek text together with notes on the various readings found in the manuscripts. Cothenet (DBSup 45: 793) notes that its variations from the MT are due to a number of causes: variant consonantal texts, revocalized consonantal texts, and attempts at reinterpreting the text.

The Greek Scroll of the Minor Prophets from Naḥal Ḥever (8 Ḥev XIIgr) was apparently hidden during the Bar Kokhba revolt against Rome (Barthélemy 1963). The text contains Hab 1:5–11; 1:14–2:8; 2:13–20; 3:9–15. Barthélemy (1963: 144–57) attributes this text to Jonathan ben Uzziel, known in Greek as Theodotion (1st century c.e.). It represents a revision of the LXX made in Judea, based on a Hebrew consonantal text which is nearly identical to the MT.

The Barberini Greek version of Habakkuk 3 appears in six medieval manuscripts dating from the 8th to the 13th century (Good 1958, 1959). It does not correspond to any other known Greek version; but it appears to have a close relationship with the Coptic versions, especially the Achmimic. It has affinities with North African Latin texts, the Palestinian Syriac version, and the Peshitta. It is a free translation which employs paraphrase and is deliberately exegetical. Good (1959: 28–30) maintains that this translation was made for liturgical purposes. Its provenance is Alexandria, and it dates to the early 2d century c.e. at the latest.

Targum Jonathan ben Uzziel on the Prophets, an Aramaic version, presupposes a Proto-MT Hebrew text (Sperber 1962). It is contemporary with Targum Onqelos but preserves traditions from the Palestinian Targum. Brownlee (1956) has noted the affinities between the interpretations found in this Targum and those of 1QpHab.

Critical editions of the Peshitta (Peshitta Institute 1980; cf. Gelston 1987) and the Vulgate (Weber 1975) have also been published.

C. Literary Issues and Authorship

The history of critical scholarship on Habakkuk through the mid-1970s has been exhaustively surveyed and evaluated by Jöcken (Habakkuk BBB). Van der Wal (1988) has published a complete bibliography of works through 1987.

1. The Book as a Whole. Most scholars maintain that the book of Habakkuk contains three major literary units: a dialogue between the prophet and God in 1:1–2:4/5; a section containing a series of woe oracles in 2:5/6–20; and a psalm in chap. 3 (Childs IOTS, 448). This view raises problems, however, in that there is little agreement concerning the interrelationship of these units. An alternative proposal (Széles Habakkuk, Zephaniah ITC; Sweeney HBC, fc.) maintains that the book of Habakkuk comprises two distinct sections: Habakkuk 1–2, the Pronouncement (maśśā˒) of Habakkuk, and Habakkuk 3, the Prayer (tĕpillâ) of Habakkuk. These sections are demarcated formally by their respective superscriptions in 1:1 and 3:1; the technical terms in 3:1, 3, 9, 13, 19, which identify Habakkuk 3 as a psalm; the distinctive mythological background of Habakkuk 3; and their respective generic characters.

The distinctive characteristics of the sections that comprise Habakkuk, however they are defined, together with the literary tensions within and between them, have raised the question of literary integrity and authorship. Many critics followed the lead of Stade (1884), who argued that 2:9–20 and chap. 3 were later additions, in arguing that Habakkuk did not constitute a unified, coherent literary work (Jöcken 1977: 116–240 surveys the history of scholarship). Under the influence of form-critical studies of the Psalms, chiefly by Mowinckel (1921–24) and Gunkel (1933), and the lexical study of Habakkuk by Humbert (1944), scholars have currently reached a consensus that although the book was probably not entirely written by a single author (contra Eissfeldt 1965 and Brownlee 1971), its present form constitutes a coherent literary unity (Jöcken 1977: 241–519). In this respect a number of scholars see the book as a liturgical or cultic composition (Mowinckel; Sellin KAT; Humbert 1944; Elliger ATD; Nielsen 1953; Eaton TBC; Jeremias 1970; Watts CBC; Haak 1986; Széles ITC) or a prophetic imitation of a cultic liturgy (Fohrer 1985). Others see it as a composition which is concerned with the prophet’s visionary experience (Rudolph KAT; Janzen 1982; Peckham 1986). A third view maintains that the book is organized around the question of theodicy (Keller 1973; Gowan 1976; Bratcher 1984; Otto 1985; Gunneweg 1986; Sweeney HBC, fc). Consequently, there is no consensus as to the nature of the final form of the book.

2. The Pronouncement of Habakkuk. In the present form of the book, the superscription in 1:1 identifies chaps. 1–2 as “The Pronouncement which Habakkuk the prophet saw.” The Hebrew term maśśā˒, “pronouncement,” “burden,” refers to a type of prophetic oracle, but its precise meaning has been an enigma. A recent investigation by Weis (1986) demonstrates that maśśā˒ refers to a specific type of prophetic discourse that attempts to explain the manner in which God’s intention will be manifested in human affairs. It is generally based on a vision or other revelatory experience and is spoken by a prophet in response to a particular situation in human events. An alternative view maintains that these chapters are an expanded form of the complaint genre (Haak 1986).

The pronouncement contains four major sections. Hab 1:2–4 is a complaint by the prophet to God concerning the oppression of the “righteous” by the “wicked.” Neither party is identified. Hab 1:5–11 is God’s response to this complaint, announcing the coming threat of the Chaldeans. Hab 1:12–17 is a second complaint by the prophet to God concerning the oppressive nature of the Chaldeans. Hab 2:1–20 constitutes the prophet’s report of God’s second response in Hab 2:1–4 together with his explanation of the meaning of God’s response in Hab 2:5–20.

The Pronouncement of Habakkuk raises three major problems which have been the subject of scholarly discussion. The first concerns the identity of the “righteous” (ṣaddı̂q) and the “wicked” (rāšā˓) in 1:4, 13, and 2:4 and the role of the Chaldeans mentioned in 1:6. Most scholars maintain that the purpose of the Chaldeans is to punish the “wicked” oppressors of the “righteous” mentioned in 1:2–4. Two possibilities have been put forward for understanding this oppression. The first identifies the “wicked” as an external enemy which is threatening righteous Judah. Assyria, Egypt (Bič 1968), Chaldea (Wellhausen 1892; Sellin KAT), Greece (Duhm 1906; Torrey 1935), or an unidentified enemy (Horst HAT [1956]) have all been proposed. The second possibility identifies the oppression as a reference to an inner Judean conflict in which a “wicked” party is opposed to a “righteous” group. Scholars who hold this view argue that the language used to describe oppression in 1:2–4 refers to internal social tensions and identify the “wicked” very generally as the wicked in Judean society (Gowan 1976; Achtemeier Nahum-Malachi IBC; Gunneweg 1986) or specifically either as those who allowed the Josianic reform to lapse (Janzen 1982; Johnson 1985) or King Jehoiakim and his supporters (Ward Habakkuk ICC; Humbert 1944; Nielsen 1953; Rudolph KAT). Others argue that the prophet’s complaint was originally directed against a Judean group but was later reapplied against Chaldea in light of historical experience (Jeremias 1970; Otto 1985; Peckham 1986; Haak 1986). Elliger (ATD) maintains that the book was originally directed against Egypt but was later reapplied against Chaldea.

Because each of these identifications presents problems, there is no consensus on the issue. A recent study by Johnson (1985) may resolve the impasse. The primary issue is to explain why Chaldea is used to correct oppression in 1:5–11 but then becomes the oppressor in 1:12–17. Johnson notes that 1:5–11 does not portray Chaldea in a positive light. He therefore concludes that the establishment of Chaldea should not be viewed as a solution to the oppression described in 1:2–4. Hab 1:5–11 does not therefore solve the old problem of theodicy but constitutes a heightened form of the complaint in 1:2–4 concerning the Chaldean oppression. Not only does this view resolve the difficulties of the text, it explains the reference to the treachery of the Chaldeans in 1:13 (cf. 2:5) in light of the long history of alliance between Judah and Babylon from the time of Hezekiah and King Josiah’s death in battle supporting Babylonian interests.

The second problem concerns the meaning of Hab 2:4 and the relation of 2:1–4 to its context. Scholars generally view 2:1–4 in relation to the preceding dialogue between Habakkuk and God and maintain that 2:1–4 is God’s response to Habakkuk’s second complaint in 1:12–17. The prophet describes his waiting for the divine response in 2:1 and reports that response in 2:2–4, where he is instructed to write his vision clearly on tablets (Holt 1964) and to wait for its fulfillment.

Scholars agree that Hab 2:4 contains the core of God’s answer to Habakkuk, but there is no consensus as to its meaning because of its grammatical and lexical problems. The verse reads, “Behold, he whose soul is not upright in him shall fail [a correction of MT ‘is puffed up’] but the righteous shall live by his faith [or ‘faithfulness’]” (RSV). Emerton’s study of the issue (1977) summarizes the problems of the first half of the verse. First, the translation of the Hebrew verb ˓uppĕlâ as “is puffed up” lacks support in the versions and appears nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible. Second, the antecedents of the pronouns “he” and “him” are not clear. Third, although the portrayal of a conceited and unjust (puffed up) figure in v 4a contrasts well with the righteous (ṣaddı̂q) of v 4b, there is no antithesis to the statement that the righteous shall live. These problems have prompted scholars to advance numerous textual emendations and interpretations (e.g., van der Woude 1966, 1970; Emerton 1977; Janzen 1980; Scott 1985), but none has gained general acceptance.

The text can be understood without resort to emendation. Hab 2:4 must be understood in relation to 2:5–20, which describes the downfall of an unsated oppressor because of excessive greed (cf. Schreiner 1974; Humbert 1944: 150–51; van der Woude 1966: 367). The vocabulary and syntax of 2:4 contrast the instability and impending fall of an arrogant oppressor with the righteous victim who will survive; the “wicked” oppressor is Chaldea and the “righteous” victim is Judah.

The third major problem presented by Habakkuk 1–2 concerns the identity of the oppressor presupposed by the woe oracles of 2:5–20. Because the crimes specified in these oracles are localized, some scholars suggest that the woes were originally directed against an internal Judean group, such as the ruling class of Jerusalem (Otto 1977; Jeremias 1970), before being reapplied against Chaldea by later editors (cf. Jer 22:13–23, where Jeremiah condemns Jehoiakim for such crimes). Others maintain that Chaldea was the intended subject of these oracles (Janzen 1982; Peckham 1986). In this respect it is important to recognize Coggins’ observation (1982) that Habakkuk may represent a different prophetic tradition from that of Jeremiah. Prophets are known for using local imagery to condemn international crimes (e.g., Amos 1:3, 11, 13; Isa 10:14; Nah 3:5–7). Furthermore, statements in the woe oracles suggest an international situation, such as the references to peoples and nations (vv 6a, 8a, 10b, 13b), the earth, humankind, and the sea (vv 8b, 14, 17b), and the violence of Lebanon (v 17a). A supporting example is Nebuchadnezzar’s report that he took Lebanon from an unnamed ruler and transported its wood back to Babylon to build a palace for the ruler of heaven and earth (ANET, 307). Such an act well suits the crimes mentioned in these oracles, which speak of extortion and plundering nations (vv 6b–8), unjust gain used to protect one’s house (vv 9–11), bloodshed to build a city (vv 12–14), and the rape of a land (vv 15–17). The prophet concludes by stating that the oppressor will fall by its idolatry (vv 18–20), which corresponds to the Chaldeans’ crime in 1:11 and 1:16 (cf. 2:13a).

3. The Prayer of Habakkuk. Habakkuk 3 begins with the superscription, “The Prayer of Habakkuk the Prophet concerning šigyōnôt.” The term šigāyôn, which has been associated with the Akk šegû, “song of lament” (Mowinckel 1921–24: 4.7; rejected by Seux 1981; see also MUSIC AND MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS) also appears in Psalm 7, a Psalm of Lament. This superscription, the technical music notations in 3:3, 9, 13, 19, and the situation of distress presupposed in the psalm have prompted many scholars to argue that Habakkuk 3 is a cultic song of lament sung as part of the temple liturgy (Sellin; Nielsen 1953; Eaton 1964; Margulis 1970). On the basis of its mythic themes of divine combat against the forces of cosmic chaos (cf. Cassuto 1975; Irwin 1942, 1956), others view it as a song of triumph (Albright 1950) or a song of victory (Hiebert 1986). Although many of these studies presuppose that the psalm was originally an oral composition because of its affinity with Ugaritic prosody (e.g., Albright 1950), Floyd (1980) disputes this view. Finally, a number of scholars have noted its associations with other theophanic texts in the Bible as well as a relationship between its framing verses (3:2, 16) and the reference to Habakkuk’s vision in 2:1–4. Consequently, they define it as a vision report (Fohrer 1985) which contains a description of a theophany (Jeremias 1965; Rudolph; Achtemeier IBC).

In its present form the prayer in vv 2–19a is a petition addressed by the psalmist to God to manifest divine power in the world in order to deliver the land from invaders (v 16). It includes an introductory section (v 2), which petitions God to manifest divine acts in the world (cf. 1:5), and a concluding section (vv 16–19a), which expresses the psalmist’s confidence that God will answer the petition. These sections bracket a description of a theophany in vv 3–15, which consists of two parts (cf. Jeremias 1965). Verses 3–6 describe the deity’s approach, and verses 7–15 depict God’s victory over the enemy in mythological terms. The theophany expresses the psalmist’s confidence that God will deliver the land (v 13), demonstrating the steadfast faith of the righteous in 2:4. Instructions to the choirmaster in v 19b follow the psalm.

Because of its distinctive character many early scholars argued that Habakkuk 3 was an independent psalm that was originally not a part of the book of Habakkuk (Stade 1884; Wellhausen 1892; Nowack HAT [1897]; Marti KHC [1904]). Although the absence of Habakkuk 3 from 1QpHab might lend support to this view (Taylor IB, 974), most scholars maintain that this is irrelevant (Eissfeldt 1965; Fohrer 1985) because the reasons for its omission are unclear (Brownlee 1971). Contemporary scholars have identified a number of reasons for associating Habakkuk 3 with Habakkuk 1–2, including the same general theme that God will bring the oppression of the people to an end; similarity of language, particularly the references to the “wicked” (rāšā˓) in 3:13 and 1:4, 13; and the relationship between 3:2, 16, which indicate that the psalmist is waiting for God to bring about deliverance, and 2:1–5, which instruct the prophet to wait for the fulfillment of the vision (Eissfeldt 1965; Fohrer 1985). Others maintain that the unity of the book is to be found in its cultic character. This argument is based on the correspondence of the vocabulary of Habakkuk 1–2 and Habakkuk 3 with cultic psalms (Humbert 1944) or the association of the genres of lament/complaint and response in Habakkuk 1–2 with the liturgical character of Habakkuk 3 (Mowinckel 1921–24 vol. 3; Sellin; Eaton). Consequently, most scholars view the book as a unity. A number of contemporary scholars maintain that Habakkuk was the author of the psalm (Eissfeldt 1965; Fohrer 1985; Brownlee 1971; Rudolph). Hiebert (1986) employs textual and motif considerations, together with evidence pertaining to the Kuntillet Ajrud inscriptions, to argue that the psalm was composed in the premonarchic period and later added to Habakkuk 1–2. Although the question of authorship cannot be settled decisively for lack of an adequate text base (cf. Peckham 1986), it is clear that in the context of the book as a whole Habakkuk 3 functions as a corroborating conclusion which responds to the issues raised in Habakkuk 1–2. The poem expresses confidence that the vision mentioned in 2:1–4 will be fulfilled and that God’s righteousness will be vindicated with the deliverance of the people from oppression.

D. Significance in Later Jewish and Christian Tradition

The book of Habakkuk has played an important role in both Jewish (Baumgartner 1885; Coleman 1964–65) and Christian (Cothenet DBSup 45: 791–811) traditions. As noted above, Habakkuk 1–2 served as the basis of a commentary which interpreted the text in relation to the early history of the Qumran community. In the NT, Hab 2:4 serves as the major textual basis for the doctrine of “justification by faith” in Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11; and Heb 10:38–39 (Sanders 1959; Feuillet 1959–60; Strobel 1964; Fitzmyer, 1981). The Talmudic Rabbi Simlai likewise identified Hab 2:4 as a summary of all 613 commandments of the Torah (b. Mak. 23b–24a). In Jewish tradition Habakkuk 3 is understood as a description of the revelation at Sinai and is read as the Haphtarah section for the second day of the Festival of Shavuot, which commemorates the revelation of the Torah at Sinai (b. Meg. 31a).

Bibliography

Albright, W. F. 1950. The Psalm of Habakkuk. Pp. 1–18 in Studies in OT Prophecy, ed. H. H. Rowley. Edinburgh.

Barthélemy, D. 1963. Les devanciers d’Aquila: Première publication intégrale du texte des fragments du Dodékapropheton. VTSup 10. Leiden.

Baumgartner, A. J. 1885. Le prophète Habakuk. Leipzig.

Betteridge, W. R. 1903. The Interpretation of the Prophecy of Habakkuk. AJT 7: 647–61.

Bicû, M. 1968. Sophonie. Nahum. Habaquq. LD 48. Paris.

Bratcher, D. 1984. The Theological Message of Habakkuk. Richmond, VA.

Brownlee, W. H. 1956. The Habakkuk Midrash and the Targum of Jonathan. JJS 7: 169–86.

———. 1959. The Text of Habakkuk in the Ancient Commentary From Qumran. SBLMS 11. Philadelphia.

———. 1963. The Placarded Revelation of Habakkuk. JBL 82: 319–25.

———. 1971. The Composition of Habakkuk. Pp. 255–75 in Hommages à André Dupont-Sommer. Paris.

———. 1979. The Midrash Pesher of Habakkuk. SBLMS 24. Missoula, MT.

Burrows, M.; Trever, J.; and Brownlee, W. H. 1950. The Dead Sea Scrolls of St. Mark’s Monastery. Vol. 1. New Haven.

Cassuto, U. 1975. Chapter III of Habakkuk and the Ras Shamra Texts. Vol. 2, Pp. 3–15 in Biblical & Oriental Studies. Jerusalem.

Coggins, R. 1982. An Alternative Prophetic Tradition? Pp. 77–94 in Israel’s Prophetic Tradition, ed. R. Coggins, A. Phillips, and M. Knibb. Cambridge.

Coleman, S. 1964–65. The Dialogue of Habakkuk in Rabbinic Doctrine. AbrN 5: 57–85.

Delcor, M. 1961. Habacuc. Pp. 389–433 in Les Petits Prophètes, by A. Deissler and M. Delcor. Vol. 8/1 in La Sainte Bible, ed. L. Pirot and A. Clamer. Paris.

Duhm, B. 1906. Das Buch Habakuk. Tübingen.

Eaton, J. H. 1964. The Origin and Meaning of Habakkuk 3. ZAW 76: 144–71.

Eissfeldt, O. 1965. The OT: An Introduction. Trans. P. R. Ackroyd. New York.

Emerton, J. A. 1977. The Textual and Linguistic Problems of Habakkuk II.4–5. JTS 28: 1–18.

Feuillet, A. 1959–60. La citation d’Habacuc II,4 et les premiers chapitres de l’épître aux Romans. NTS 4: 52–80.

Fitzmyer, J. A. 1981. Habakkuk 2:3–4 and the NT. Pp. 236–46 in To Advance the Gospel. New York.

Floyd, M. H. 1980. Oral Tradition as a Problematic Factor in the Historical Interpretation of the Poems in the Law and the Prophets. Ph.D. diss., Claremont.

Fohrer, G. 1985. Das “Gebet des Propheten Habakuk” (Hab 3,1–16). Pp. 159–67 in Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l’honneur de M. Mathias Delcor, ed. A. Caquot, S. Légasse, and M. Tardieu. AOAT 215. Kevelaer and Neukirchen.

Gelston, A. 1987. The Peshitta of the Twelve Prophets. Oxford.

Good, E. M. 1958. The Text and Versions of Habakkuk 3: A Study in Textual History. Ph.D. diss., Columbia University.

———. 1959. The Barberini Greek Version of Habakkuk III. VT 9: 9–30.

Gowan, D. E. 1968. Habakkuk and Wisdom. Perspective 9: 157–66.

———. 1976. The Triumph of Faith in Habakkuk. Atlanta.

Gunkel, H. 1933. Einleitung in die Psalmen. 4th ed. Göttingen. Repr. 1985.

Gunneweg, A. H. J. 1986. Habakuk und das Problem des leidenden ṣaddı̂q. ZAW 98: 400–415.

Haak, R. 1986. Habakkuk Among the Prophets. Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago.

———. 1988. “Poetry” in Habakkuk 1:1–2:4? JAOS 108: 437–44.

Hiebert, T. 1986. God of My Victory: The Ancient Hymn in Habakkuk 3. HSM 38. Atlanta.

Holt, J. M. 1964. So He May Run Who Reads It. JBL 83: 298–302.

Humbert, P. 1944. Problèmes du Livre d’Habacuc. Neuchâtel.

Irwin, W. A. 1942. The Psalm of Habakkuk. JNES 1: 10–40.

———. 1956. The Mythological Background of Habakkuk, Chapter 3. JNES 15: 47–50.

Janzen, J. G. 1980. Habakkuk 2:2–4 in the Light of Recent Philological Advances. HTR 73: 53–78.

———. 1982. Eschatological Symbol and Existence in Habakkuk. CBQ 44: 394–414.

Jeremias, J. 1965. Theophanie: Die Geschichte einer alttestamentlichen Gattung. WMANT 10. Neukirchen-Vluyn.

———. 1970. Kultprophetie und Gerichtsverkündigung in der späten Königszeit Israels. WMANT 35. Neukirchen.

Jöcken, P. 1977. War Habakuk ein Kultprophet? Pp. 319–32 in Bausteine Biblischer Theologie, ed. H.-J. Fabry. BBB 50. Bonn.

Johnson, M. D. 1985. The Paralysis of Torah in Habakkuk I 4. VT 35: 257–66.

Keller, C. A. 1973. Die Eigenart der Prophetie Habakuks. ZAW 85: 156–67.

Lachmann, J. 1932. Das Buch Habbakuk: Eine Textkritische Studie. Aussig.

Margulis, B. 1970. The Psalm of Habakkuk. ZAW 82: 409–42.

Mowinckel, M. 1921–24. Psalmenstudien. 6 vols. Kristiana.

Nielsen, E. 1953. The Righteous and the Wicked in Hăbaqqūq. ST 6: 54–78.

Otto, E. 1977. Die Stellung der Wehe-Worte inder Verkündigung des Propheten Habakuk. ZAW 89: 73–107.

———. 1985. Die Theologie des Buches Habakuk. VT 35: 274–95.

Peckham, B. 1986. The Vision of Habakkuk. CBQ 48: 617–36.

Peshitta Institute. 1980. The OT in Syriac According to the Peshitta Version. Vol. 3/4. Leiden.

Sanders, J. A. 1959. Habakkuk in Qumran, Paul, and the OT. JR 39: 232–43.

———. 1979. Text and Canon: Concepts and Method. JBL 98: 5–29.

Schreiner, S. 1974. Erwägungen zum Text von Hab 2,4–5. ZAW 86: 538–42.

Scott, J. M. 1985. A New Approach to Habakkuk II 4–5A. VT 35: 330–40.

Seux, M.-J. 1981. Šiggayôn = šigû? Pp. 419–38 in Mélanges bibliques et orientaux en l’honneur de M. Henri Cazelles, ed. A. Caquot and M. Delcor. AOAT 212. Kevelaer and Neukirchen-Vluyn.

Sperber, A. 1962. The Latter Prophets according to Targum Jonathan. Vol. 3 of The Bible in Aramaic. Leiden.

Stade, B. 1884. Habakuk. ZAW 4: 154–59.

Strobel, A. 1964. Untersuchungen zum eschatologischen Verzögerungs-problem auf Grund der späjüdisch-urchristlichen Geschichte von Habakuk 2,2ff. NovTSup 2. Leiden.

Sweeney, M. A. fc. Structure, Genre, and Intent in the Book of Habakkuk. VT 41.

Torrey, C. C. 1935. The Prophecy of Habakkuk. Pp. 565–82 in Jewish Studies in Memory of George A. Kohut, ed. S. Baron and A. Marx. New York.

Trever, J. 1972. Scrolls from Qumran Cave I. Jerusalem.

Uffenheimer, B. 1987. Habakkuk from Shutter to Step: Observations on Habakkuk 1–2. Pp. 69–92 in Studies in Bible Dedicated to the Memory of U. Cassuto, ed. S. Loewenstamm. Jerusalem (in Hebrew).

Wal, A. van der. 1988. Nahum, Habakkuk: A Classified Bibliography. Amsterdam.

Weber, R. 1975. Biblia sacra iuxta Vulgatam versionem. Rev. ed. Stuttgart.

Weis, R. D. 1986. A Definition of the Genre Maśśā˒ in the Hebrew Bible. Ph.D. diss., Claremont, CA.

Wellhausen, J. 1892. Die Kleinen Propheten. Berlin. Repr. 1963.

Woude, A. S. van der. 1966. Der Gerechte Wird Durch Seine Treue Leben: Erwägungen zu Habakuk 2:4–5. Pp. 367–75 in Studia Biblica et Semitica Theodoro Christiano Vriezen. Wageningen.

———. 1970. Habakuk 2,4. ZAW 82: 281–82.

Ziegler, J. 1943. Duodecim prophetae. Göttingen.

Marvin A. Sweeney

Freedman, D. N. (1996, c1992). The Anchor Bible Dictionary (3:2). New York: Doubleday.

Habakkuk, Prophecies of — were probably written about B.C. 650-627, or, as some think, a few years later. This book consists of three chapters, the contents of which are thus comprehensively described: “When the prophet in spirit saw the formidable power of the Chaldeans approaching and menacing his land, and saw the great evils they would cause in Judea, he bore his complaints and doubts before Jehovah, the just and the pure (1:2–17). And on this occasion the future punishment of the Chaldeans was revealed to him (2). In the third chapter a presentiment of the destruction of his country, in the inspired heart of the prophet, contends with his hope that the enemy would be chastised.” The third chapter is a sublime song dedicated “to the chief musician,” and therefore intended apparently to be used in the worship of God. It is “unequalled in majesty and splendour of language and imagery.”

The passage in 2:4, “The just shall live by his faith,” is quoted by the apostle in Rom. 1:17. (Comp. Gal. 3:12; Heb. 10:37, 38.)

Easton, M. (1996, c1897). Easton's Bible dictionary. Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.

HABAKKUK, BOOK OF Eighth book of the Minor Prophets in the OT.

PREVIEW

•Author

•Date

•Background

•Purpose and Theological Teaching

•Content

Author Little is known about the prophet Habakkuk apart from information that may be gained from the book of Habakkuk itself. In 1:1 and 3:1 he is called a prophet, a spokesman for God to his fellow Israelites.

The prayer of chapter 3 contains several musical designations (Hb 3:1, 3, 9, 13, 19). Such technical notations suggest that the author had some responsibility for the temple music. If that is so, he may have been a member of one of the Levitical families. The apocryphal book Bel and the Dragon contains a reference to Habakkuk as “the son of Jesus of the tribe of Levi,” possibly reflecting such a tradition.

The book portrays Habakkuk as a man of deep moral sensitivity who rebelled at the injustice that characterized the society of his day.

Date Although it is difficult to date the prophecy of Habakkuk precisely, several clues to its date appear in the text. In 1:5–6 the prophet refers to the Chaldeans whom God is “rousing.” The Chaldeans were originally a group of loosely organized tribes who occupied a large portion of the Assyrian Empire. They were a constant source of trouble to their Assyrian lords. Eventually, the Chaldeans successfully rebelled against the Assyrian power, placing Nabopolassar on the throne (625–605 bc). The Chaldeans then ruled all of Babylonia, establishing the Babylonian Empire and inaugurating a period of extensive expansion. Because the Chaldeans came to power about 625 bc, many scholars think that the prophecy of Habakkuk was written shortly before that time. The book would have been written, then, within the reign of Josiah (640–609 bc). Habakkuk 1:6 does not necessarily refer to the initial rise of the Chaldeans. Their reputation was already established as warlike and cruel, for the prophet described them as cruel and violent; they are said to march across the world and conquer it (1:6–8). Their reputation for military prowess seems to fit best with a time after the battle of Carchemish (605 bc), when Nebuchadnezzar II defeated the Egyptians and established the Babylonians as an important world power, but it is also possible that their reputation was gained from the Babylonian conquest of Nineveh in 612 bc.

The social conditions in Habakkuk’s day seem to fit with a time toward the end of the reign of Judah’s King Josiah. Although Josiah’s reign was characterized by far-reaching religious reforms, initiated by the discovery of the Book of the Law during renovations in the temple (2 Kgs 22:8), Habakkuk describes society as filled with “destruction and violence” (Hb 1:3). An unfair judicial system led to oppression of the righteous (v 4). Because it is also possible that he was referring to the world at large, it seems best to date Habakkuk’s ministry as starting between 612 and 605 bc, and continuing during the reign of Jehoiakim (609–598 bc).

Background The historical period inaugurated by King Josiah’s death was one of the most bitter in the history of the kingdom of Judah. In 612 bc the Babylonians destroyed the Assyrian city of Nineveh, and in two years they eliminated the last vestiges of formal Assyrian rule in Mesopotamia. The Egyptians, who had been allies of the Assyrians, sought to solidify their hold on the western portion of the former Assyrian Empire. They marched to Carchemish, an important city on the Euphrates River, where they were opposed by Josiah, who died in the battle there.

The Egyptians placed Jehoiakim on the throne in place of Jehoahaz, the rightful successor of Josiah. Jehoiakim was an Egyptian vassal, and the land of Judah was forced to pay heavy tribute. The faith of many people might understandably have begun to falter in that time. The religious reforms under Josiah had resulted not in national blessing but in the loss of their freedom. The tenor of society had changed from one of relative stability to one of oppression and violence (see Jer 22:17).

In 604 bc the Babylonians advanced into the Syro-Palestinian area, encountering only weak resistance. At that time Jehoiakim transferred his allegiance to Nebuchadnezzar, who continued his advance to the south. When Pharaoh Neco’s army challenged the invaders, both sides suffered heavy losses and Nebuchadnezzar retreated to Babylon. The vacillating Jehoiakim then transferred his loyalty to Egypt. In 598 bc the Babylonians again advanced into Syro-Palestine, beginning a campaign that led to the fall of Jerusalem in 586 bc.

Purpose and Theological Teaching The main purpose of Habakkuk’s prophecy is to explain what a godly person’s attitude should be toward the presence of evil in the world. It also addresses the nature of God’s justice in punishing moral evil.

The teaching of the book is set forth in an interesting pattern of crucial questions by the prophet about God’s activity in history. His questions may reflect deep doubts and concerns, or they may be a literary device for reflecting the questions that people in his society were asking. In the psalm at the end of the book, the prophet shows that he has reached an understanding of God’s purposes, and he rests in utter submission to God. One of the prophet’s chief problems was the seeming inactivity of God, as evil continued unpunished. God’s answer was that he does punish evil in his own time and with his chosen instruments. The world is not an arena in which evil continually triumphs. History testifies to the fall of tyrants and wicked nations. The godly person thus interprets history in terms of faith—trusting God and affirming God’s righteous rule in the world.

The book of Habakkuk does not explain why God has allowed evil in the world. It does affirm that a righteous person will see God’s activity in history through the eyes of faith. Chapter 3 eloquently expresses that theme as Habakkuk looks at history and recounts God’s gracious activity on behalf of his people.

One of the most important theological concepts in the book is that of God’s sovereign activity in history. Habakkuk affirms God’s control of all history and demonstrates that even the godless nations are subject to his control. Their rise and fall is determined not by the fortuitous course of events but by God.

Content

The First Complaint and Its Response (1:1–11) The prophecy of Habakkuk begins with a series of questions reflecting the prophet’s deep feelings over the wrongs rampant in his society. He begins by asking how long he will have to cry to God, who does not seem to hear. Many have asked that question as they see evil present in a world governed by the sovereign God.

The answer that the prophet received was unusual. The Lord was surely doing something about the evil in his society; he was raising up the Chaldeans as an instrument of his wrath to punish the people of Judah.

The description of the Chaldeans in 1:6–11 is filled with bold metaphors that depict them as an awesome force pillaging as they advance in their conquests. One might well wonder, as the prophet did, why God would use such a tool to accomplish his purposes.

The prophet’s first complaint reflects a number of perplexing problems. Why does God not do something about evil? Why does he allow it to continue? God does not always seems to respond when people want him to.

Furthermore, when God did answer, he said he would punish the evil in Judah by using the Babylonians. The prophet’s prayer was answered, but in a way he did not expect. God would use a hated and wicked nation to punish the wrongs of his own people. Habakkuk must have been perplexed at this, but he could take comfort in one fact: God was still in control of history (Hb 1:5–6). God governed the rise and fall of nations, using even wicked ones to accomplish his will.

The Second Complaint and Its Response (1:12–2:5) The answer to the first complaint was not enough for Habakkuk. He acknowledged that God had “decreed the rise of these Babylonians to punish and correct us for our terrible sins” (1:12, nlt). But he goes on to say, “You are perfectly just in this. But will you, who cannot allow sin in any form, stand idly by while they swallow us up? Should you be silent while the wicked destroy people who are more righteous than they?” (v 13, nlt). He implies that God observes the wicked Chaldeans but does not punish them for their wrongs. Habakkuk still cannot understand how God can use a wicked nation to punish his own people.

But Habakkuk did learn something from God’s first response. He began his second complaint with the affirmation “O Lord my God, my Holy One, you who are eternal—is your plan in all of this to wipe us out? Surely not!” (1:12, nlt). The prophet probably had in mind the previous verse, which declared that the god of the Chaldeans was their own military might. In contrast, Judah’s God is eternal and not transitory like the fleeting strength of armies and nations.

Habakkuk’s problem was still not resolved, for he next described the rapacious nature of the Chaldeans, wondering how God could use them to punish Judah. The Chaldeans were like fishermen, catching people in their nets and then worshiping their nets (1:15–16). Habakkuk asked God if the Chaldeans would continue emptying their nets and slaying the nations (v 17).

Having posed his questions, the prophet waited to see what God’s response would be (2:1). The Lord replied that his answer should be written in large, clear letters, for it was certain (v 2), but it would not be fulfilled immediately (v 3).

What follows is one of the greatest verses about faith in the whole OT (2:4). The words “the righteous will live by their faith” became the touchstone of Paul’s message and of the Protestant Reformation. The apostle Paul appealed to Habakkuk 2:4 in his exposition of the doctrine of justification by faith (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11). This passage was also important in the NT book of Hebrews (Heb 10:38–39).

The word “faith” in the OT basically means “firmness” or “strength.” The root of the word is used to describe the supporting posts of a door (2 Kgs 18:16) and firm support for a peg (Is 22:23). When used of God, the word has the sense of faithfulness or of unwavering commitment to his promises. Referring specifically to human faith, it means unwavering trust in the God who promised. Faith in the OT is not an abstract concept but rather is commitment to God. It is not characterized by works but by an attitude of wholehearted trust in God.

God affirms in Habakkuk 2:4 that a truly righteous person will live by unwavering trust in God, trust that remains firm in spite of trials. Jesus taught the same thing in the parable of the sower (Mt 13:21), and it is also expressed in James 1:12.

God’s answer to Habakkuk’s complaint was that he does punish evil, but in his time and his way. A truly righteous person will not lose faith because evil is not immediately eliminated or the wicked quickly punished. Faith trusts in the sovereignty of God’s righteous rule in this world.

A Taunt-Song Celebrating the Fall of the Chaldeans (2:6–20) After hinting at the fall of the Chaldeans, the prophet composes a taunt-song in which he depicts the gloomy future of that nation. When the Babylonian Empire fell to a coalition of Medes and Persians, the prophetic elements in Habakkuk’s poem became historical reality.

The prophet affirms that Babylon’s “debtors” will arise against her (Hb 2:7). This expression implies that some nations would suddenly arise to bring about Babylon’s downfall.

The reason for the destruction of Babylon is cited in 2:8: “You have plundered many nations; now they will plunder you” (nlt). The OT principle of retributive justice teaches that God’s moral law extends not only to believers but to unbelievers as well.

The great building efforts of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar seem to be implied in 2:9–11. The prophet says that even the stones and beams of his cities will cry out, as though protesting the fact that the city was built with blood (vv 11–12).

Habakkuk condemns the Chaldeans, not only for their inhuman cruelty, but also for the shameful way in which they treated their captive peoples. The prophet pictures this degrading treatment in a vivid metaphor, saying it is like making others drunk in order to gaze on their shame (2:15).

Habakkuk concludes his taunt-song with a denunciation of Chaldean idolatry, pointing out the folly of those who make gods from wood and stone (2:18–19). The Chaldeans, like other pagan peoples, attributed their success to their idols. The prophet implies that because such trust is groundless—their idols are powerless to help them—Babylon will fall.

Habakkuk goes on to make a striking contrast between the Lord and the idols created by people: “The Lord isin his holy Temple. Let all the earth be silent before him” (2:20, nlt). God is real and he is sovereign. The prophet’s word is that the earth should wait in hushed silence for the judgment that will surely come.

The Prayer of Habakkuk (3:1–19) The prophecy of Habakkuk closes with a prayer, reminiscent of some of the OT psalms. It contains a superscription (3:1) and several musical notations.

Some have argued that this chapter is not originally Habakkuk’s, because it does not fit the narrative flow of the book. They regard the chapter as originating in the postexilic period.

However, the psalm could have been written by the prophet and added to his prophetic oracles, either by himself or by a secretary. The musical notations do not necessarily point to a later period, because many psalms have such musical directions, and their preexilic date has been substantiated by linguistic and historical studies.

The prayer is similar to the message of Habakkuk. In it he affirms that God will judge his enemies (3:16), and he praises God’s sovereignty (v 3). Both themes are prominent in the prophetic oracles of chapters 1 and 2.

The prayer is filled with assurances of God’s power and justice. It forms a fitting conclusion to the body of the book, in which the prophet questioned divine providence. It demonstrates that the prophet had come to a place of unshakeable faith as he observed God’s activity in history.

See also Habakkuk (Person); Israel, History of; Prophecy; Prophet, Prophetess.

Elwell, W. A., & Comfort, P. W. (2001). Tyndale Bible dictionary. Tyndale reference library (557). Wheaton, Ill.: Tyndale House Publishers.

HABAK´KUK, BOOK OF. The prophecy is named from its evident author (1:1), of whom practically nothing is known. From the reference “For the choir director on my stringed instruments” (3:19), combined with the reference to Habakkuk as “the son of Jesus of the tribe of Levi” in the apocryphal legend of Bel and the Dragon, some scholars such as S. Mowinckel have come to the conclusion that the prophet was a Levitical member of the Temple choir.

Time of Composition. The book is evidently to be placed in the general period of the rise of the neo-Babylonian Empire around 620 b.c., since allusion is made to the Chaldean invasion (1:5–6). The preferred date of many critics is in the latter portion of Josiah’s reign (c. 625–608 b.c.) or in the reign of Jehoiakim (608–597 b.c.). B. Duhm, E. Sellin, and C. C. Torrey unwarrantedly change Kasdim, that is, Chaldeans, in 1:6 to Kittim (Cypriotes), declaring that the prophecy was aimed at Alexander the Great, and date the book that late.

Criticism. Literary critics have handled the book of Habakkuk harshly. Karl Marti leaves only seven verses of the entire book intact. B. Duhm, who is scarcely to be called conservative, says that Marti treats the book as cruelly as Yahweh is said to treat the house of the ungodly (3:13): “Thou didst strike the head of the house of the evil to lay him open from thigh to neck.” Critics differ considerably with regard to the unity of chaps. 1–2. Chapter 3 is more commonly derived from chaps. 1–2 and dated in the fourth or third century b.c. (Pfeiffer). However, the theme of both is the same, and both contain linguistic likenesses. Chapter 3 is specifically called a prayer of Habakkuk (v. 1). The technical musical terms contained in it need not be relegated to a postexilic period, for they were evidently in use in preexilic times in the psalter.

Content.

I. Prophet’s twofold complaint (1:1–2:20)

A. The first complaint (1:1–11)

1. Israel’s sin and God’s silence (1:2–4)

2. God’s reply: the Chaldean invasion (1:5–11)

B. The second complaint (1:12–2:20)

1. Chaldean cruelty and God’s silence (1:12–2:1)

2. God’s response: Israel’s salvation; woes upon the Chaldeans (2:2–20)

II. Prayer of the prophet (3:1–19)

A. Title (3:1)

B. Initial request (3:2)

C. A theophany (3:3–15)

D. An unperturbable faith (3:16–19)

Canonicity. The book is quoted prominently in the NT, and the references there give Habakkuk significance theologically (cf. Acts 13:41 with Hab. 1:5; Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11; and Heb. 10:38 with Hab. 2:4). Both Jewish and Christian thought have accorded the book canonical authority. From the Qumran caves came a commentary on the first two chapters of Habakkuk that interpreted the prophecy in terms of the history of the Qumran community.

bibliography: G. A. Smith, The Book of the Twelve Prophets (1928), 2:115–61; E. B. Pusey, The Minor Prophets (1962); R. K. Harrison, Introduction to the Old Testament (1969), pp. 931–38; 2:165–223; F. E. Gaebelein, Four Minor Prophets (1970), pp. 141ff.; C. L. Feinberg, The Minor Prophets (1976), pp. 205ff.; F. A. Tatford, The Minor Prophets (1982), 2:5:11–63; C. J. Barber, Habakkuk and Zephaniah (1985); F. E. Gaebelein, ed., Expositor’s Bible Commentary (1985), 7:493–534.

Unger, M. F., Harrison, R. K., Vos, H. F., Barber, C. J., & Unger, M. F. (1988). The new Unger's Bible dictionary. Revision of: Unger's Bible dictionary. 3rd ed. c1966. (Rev. and updated ed.). Chicago: Moody Press.

HABAKKUK, BOOK OF.

I. Outline of contents

The prophecy attributed to Habakkuk consists of six sections.

a. 1:1–4. The prophet cries to God because of the lawlessness he sees around him and asks how long it will go unpunished.

b. 1:5–11. As if in reply, God announces that he is raising up the Chaldeans and describes the fierceness of their armies and their contempt for all who stand in their way.

c. 1:12–17. But if God is holy, how can he allow the brutal inhumanity and idolatry of the Chaldeans, whose atrocities are worse than the evils that they are sent to punish?

d. 2:1–5. The prophet waits in imagination upon his watchtower to see if God will resolve his dilemma. The answer comes in the asseveration of the principle that the pride of the Chaldean will be his downfall and the faithfulness of the righteous will be his salvation.

e. 2:6–20. A taunt-song (māšāl) addressed to the Chaldeans, consisting of a series of five woes predicting dire consequences upon them for the acts of inhumanity for which they are responsible.

f. 3:1–19. If this psalm of Habakkuk has any connection with the theme of the earlier chapters it describes a revelation of God coming in his awful majesty to bring judgment upon the nations and salvation to his people.

II. Authorship

So little is known of the prophet Habakkuk that anything that is written about him must be conjectural and based on internal evidence. His name may be connected with a Heb. root meaning ‘embrace’ (ḥbq) or with an Assyr. plant name, ḥambaḳuḳu. The Gk. form of his name is Hambakoum. The suggestions that he was the son of the Shunammite woman of 2 Ki. 4:16, or the watchman of Is. 21:6, have as little evidence to support them as the tradition associating him with Daniel in the lions’ den (so Bel and the Dragon, verses 33ff.).

III. Date and background

There has been considerable discussion among scholars about which if any of these sections are original to Habakkuk, and there is no agreement with regard to unity, authorship and date. The only clear historical reference is to the Chaldeans in 1:6 and so the prophecy is usually dated at the close of the 7th century bc shortly after the battle of Carchemish (605 bc) when the Chaldeans routed the Egyptians under Pharaoh Neco on the fords of the Euphrates and marched W to subjugate King Jehoiakim of Judah.

The theory of Duhm and C. C. Torrey that ‘Chaldeans’ (Heb. kaśdı̂m) should read ‘Kittim’ in the sense of ‘Greeks’ was based on the problematical 1:9 (Heb. lit. ‘the eagerness of their faces is eastwards‘). This would fit in better with Alexander’ s invasion from the W (and a 4th-century date) than with Nebuchadrezzar’s from the N or E. But the text of 1:9 is extremely difficult; there is no textual evidence for the reading ‘Kittim’ in 1:6; and the traditional dating is to be preferred.

IV. The prophet’s message

A unity of theme may be observed throughout the book, though whether this is due to ‘the molding influence of liturgical use’ (Irwin) or to unity of authorship cannot be known. Habakkuk deals with the moral problem of God’s raising up of the Chaldeans to inflict his judgment upon Judah, when their cruelty and barbarity are a denial of his righteousness. The answer given in 2:4 is that a man’s arrogance carries within it the seed of his ruin, whereas the faithful man is assured of living in the light of God’s favour. Clearly the full Pauline meaning of faith is not to be found in this oft-quoted scripture (cf. Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11; Heb. 10:38); indeed, it is doubtful whether Pauline faith could have been expressed by any Heb. word. But the NT gives a legitimate development of the prophet’s thought through the medium of the lxx translation, pistis.

The Commentary on Habakkuk of the Dead Sea Scrolls interprets 1:4–2:20 only in the light of the history of the Qumran sect and gives no clue to the meaning of the prophecy. Although on 1:6 and elsewhere it reads ‘This means the Kittim’, there is no suggestion that the original ‘Kasdim’ was in need of emendation.

Bibliography. Commentaries by S. R. Driver, A. B. Davidson, J. H. Eaton and standard series. C. C. Torrey, ‘The Prophecy of Habakkuk’, in Jewish Studies in Memory of George A. Kohut, 1935; W. A. Irwin, ‘The Psalm of Habakkuk’, JNES 1, 1942, pp. 10–40; W. F. Albright, ‘The Psalm of Habakkuk’, in H. H. Rowley (ed.), Studies in OT Prophecy, 1950, pp. 1–18; D. M. Lloyd-Jones, From Fear to Faith, 1953. j.b.tr.

Wood, D. R. W., Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. (1996, c1982, c1962). New Bible Dictionary. Includes index. (electronic ed. of 3rd ed.) (438). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.

Habakkuk, the Book of, (huh-bakʹkuhk), the thirty-fifth book in the Christian ot and one of the twelve Minor Prophets. Nothing is known about the prophet Habakkuk except what can be deduced from his oracles. The book consists of two distinct parts (chaps. 1-2 and chap. 3), each with its own heading. After the title in 1:1 there is a lament concerning the success of the wicked (1:2-4). God responds in 1:5-11 that he is raising up the Chaldeans (i.e., Babylonians) whose cruel power is irresistible. In 1:12-17 the prophet renews his complaint, acknowledging the success of the Babylonians as an act of God’s judgment, but asking when their excesses will be judged. God responds a second time in 2:1-5. Despite the apparent delay, the fulfillment of the vision will be accomplished in its proper time, and the righteous who remain faithful will be preserved. (Paul quotes Hab. 2:4b with an altered sense in Rom. 1:17 and Gal. 3:11.) A series of five threats against the wicked (each introduced by ‘woe to’) follows in 2:6-19. A liturgical summons to keep silence before God introduces the prayer of Habakkuk in chap. 3. The prayer is actually a hymn with strong mythological overtones, describing God’s appearance to do battle with his enemies (cf. Judg. 5; Deut. 33; Ps. 68). The hymn contains technical notes concerning its (musical?) performance such as one finds in the book of Psalms.

The reference to the coming of the Chaldeans in 1:6 makes it likely that Habakkuk was active in the last quarter of the seventh century b.c. It is unclear, however, to whom Habakkuk refers as ‘the wicked.’ It may be the Assyrians who ruled Judah until their defeat by the Babylonians in 612 b.c. (an event referred to in the book of Nahum, written at about this time). On the other hand, Habakkuk may have been referring to corrupt Judean nobles whom he expected the Babylonians to overthrow before being themselves destroyed by God’s power (a point stressed by Jeremiah, also a contemporary of Habakkuk). The lament-response form of chaps. 1-2 and the psalmlike hymn in chap. 3 may indicate that the book took shape as a liturgy for use in the Temple. Other prophets whose work is probably to be related to the Temple worship are Nahum, Obadiah, and Joel. In the first century b.c. the Qumran community (authors of the Dead Sea Scrolls) produced a commentary on Habakkuk 1-2, relating it to historical events in their own time.

This short book (it contains only fifty-six verses) may be outlined as follows:

I. Title (1:1)

II. Dialogue-lament (1:2-2:19)

A. Lament on the success of the wicked (1:2-4)

B. God’s response (1:5-11)

C. Lament on the success of Babylon (1:12-17)

D. God’s response (2:1-5)

E. Five woes against the wicked (2:6-19)

III. Hymn on God’s victory over his enemies (2:20-3:19). See also Chaldea; Jeremiah, The Book of; Nahum, The Book of; Scrolls, The Dead Sea. C.A.N.

Achtemeier, P. J., Harper & Row, P., & Society of Biblical Literature. (1985). Harper's Bible dictionary. Includes index. (1st ed.) (364). San Francisco: Harper & Row.

Habakkuk, Book of

The eighth of the Minor Prophets. In spite of its small size (three chapters) it has been the object of considerable scholarly debate, partly because of difficulties inherent in its historical-critical interpretation and also because it contains passages that have been productive in the development of later Jewish and Christian traditions.

Text

Several ancient witnesses to the text of Habakkuk exist in addition to the Masoretic textual tradition. Primary among these witnesses is the commentary found among the Dead Sea Scrolls (1QpHab). Another important witness to the Hebrew text is a 2nd-century Minor Prophets scroll discovered in 1955 in the Wadi Murabba˓ât. Early Greek versions also help in establishing the text. A 1st-century Greek manuscript of the Minor Prophets (8 Ḥev XII gr) including Habakkuk was discovered in the Naḥal Ḥever in 1952. These witnesses confirm the consonantal text of the MT as a firm basis for study, although considerable difficulties in understanding the text are evident, particularly in ch. 3.

Scholars have long questioned the status of Hab. 3 since a large part of this chapter is arguably more archaic than the rest of the book. This chapter’s absence from 1QpHab leads some to conclude that it was a late addition to the book, but its inclusion in the early Murabba˓ât and Naḥal Ḥever scrolls makes this position less likely. Most scholars today consider ch. 3 to be an integral part of the book, while admitting that the author may have reused an older poem.

Form

The basic genres used within the book have been widely recognized: 1:2–2:4/5, complaints and responses; 2:6–19, woe oracles; 3:2–19, psalm. Within this broad structure, however, considerable debate has been generated about the relationship between the various parts. While some have seen these sections as integrally related in a unified composition, the majority of scholars believe that they reflect a gradual growth at the hand of the author and/or redactors. The decision made about these issues influences and is influenced by the understanding of the book’s message and its historical context.

Recent studies have begun to examine the book’s function within the grouping of the Minor Prophets and in the canon as a whole. How productive this approach will be in the long term remains to be seen.

Historical Context and Central Message

The superscription identifies the author as “Habakkuk the prophet.” Nothing further is known of Habakkuk as a historical figure, although he is also mentioned in later literature such as Bel and the Dragon. Because of the author’s apparent familiarity with the literary genres and ideology of the temple, some scholars have considered him to have been a prophet officially associated with the Jerusalem cult.

The only certain historical reference within the book is the mention of “the Chaldeans” in 1:6. This term normally refers to the Neo-Babylonian Empire which rose to power in the late 7th century b.c.e. and controlled Jerusalem until 538. While a wide range of other “meanings” has been ascribed to this reference — from the earlier Assyrians to the later Romans — there seems to be no compelling reason to discount this term as a historical reference.

Those who believe that an original oracle grew through additions by the prophet or redactors date parts of the work as late as the postexilic period. The most likely setting for the origin of the work is within the political turmoil in Judah at the end of the 7th century, probably shortly after the Babylonian defeat of an Egyptian force at Carchemish in 605. Jehoahaz, the previous king of Judah, had been deposed by Necho II of Egypt and replaced with Jehoiakim. Conflict within Judah between those who favored pro-Egyptian and pro-Babylonian positions was at a peak.

Identification of the anonymous figures of the “righteous” and the “wicked” found within the complaints is central to the issues of dating and the book’s message. Habakkuk states that the righteous are being surrounded and swallowed by the wicked (1:4, 13). The complaints against the wicked and the later woe oracles appear at times to be directed against internal enemies; at other times they seem to envision an external threat. Some interpreters attribute the changing perspectives to chronological considerations, i.e., they reflect different periods within the experience of the author (or redactors). It is also possible that for the author a clear distinction between external and internal enemies was not appropriate. Both were considered enemies of “the righteous.” This leaves open the possibility of a unified composition.

A central concern of the book is justice — certainly the justice of the enemies and possibly that of God. The book echoes the complaints of the Psalms when it asks, “How long shall I cry for help, and you will not listen?” (1:2). This question begins a conversation between the author and God concerning the nature of God’s response to injustice. The prophet first complains of a lack of response (1:2–4). Most scholars understand the second complaint (1:13–2:1) to be a reaction to God’s promise of raising the Chaldeans as an instrument of punishment. If the object of the second complaint is the Chaldeans, it appears that the prophet continues by complaining that the punishment is worse than the evil it is intended to correct. A high point is reached in 2:4, a verse with difficult grammatical problems: “the righteous because of its/his fidelity will live.” The antecedent of the pronoun is disputed. It may be the fidelity of the righteous one himself. Others understand it to refer to the fidelity of the vision provided by God or even a reference directly to God. This passage becomes important in the later Christian tradition (cf. Rom. 1:17; Gal. 3:11; Heb. 10:38–39). In Jewish tradition this verse is considered a summary of the commands of the Torah (b. Mak. 23b–24a).

The third chapter concludes with a psalm describing a theophany which expresses the author’s confidence that ultimately God and his justice will prevail. In light of this confidence the book ends with praise of God. Scholarly debate has questioned whether this chapter should be understood as a victory taking place outside history, making it one of the earliest eschatological texts. Another view, while admitting the cosmic nature of the events described in the theophany, understands the deliverance as occurring within the historical realm. The theophany of Hab. 3 is read during Shavuot (Weeks) in the Jewish tradition.

Bibliography. R. D. Haak, Habakkuk. VTSup 44 (Leiden, 1992); T. Hiebert, “The Book of Habakkuk,” NIB 7 (1996): 621–55; J. J. M. Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah. OTL (Louisville, 1991).

Robert D. Haak

Freedman, D. N., Myers, A. C., & Beck, A. B. (2000). Eerdmans dictionary of the Bible (535). Grand Rapids, Mich.: W.B. Eerdmans.