Follow Bible Fiber wherever you listen to podcasts or subscribe to our Youtube Channel
More than any of the other prophetic books, Habakkuk provides a glimpse into the relationship between Yahweh and his messengers. Habakkuk is not delivering an oracle to the people. His book is not the recording of a sermon with “Thus saith” or “Woe to you.” Rather, it is a prayer dialogue that was once personal and became public. What we find in his back-and-forth with God is a bold honesty by the prophet and a gentle sincerity emanating from Yahweh.
Superscription
Habakkuk provides little in the way of a biographical sketch in his superscription. There is no mention of his town of origin, his father’s name, or the name of any reigning kings during his ministry. Even his name is of questionable etymology. Habak either stems from the Hebrew word for “embrace” or from an Akkadian root for garden flower.
The book begins, “the oracle that the prophet Habakkuk saw” (1:1). Blink, and you will miss an important detail. Habakkuk’s name includes the title “prophet.” He is the only preexilic prophet to have his name associated with the title. Two postexilic books use the title prophet in their superscription: Haggai 1:1 and Zechariah 1:1. Biblical scholars theorize that including the prophetic title in Habakkuk suggests he was a professional prophet at the Jerusalem temple. Habakkuk’s writing shows he was familiar with temple liturgy, as will become apparent in the last section. If Habakkuk was part of the religious elite in Jerusalem, he stands in contrast with a messenger like Amos, a shepherd-turned-prophet operating on the margins of society.
Despite the short superscription, there are historical hints later in the text that help date the prophet’s ministry. In Habakkuk 1, Yahweh announces the rise of the Babylonians and describes their rapid advance across the ancient Near East. Scholars deduce from this clue that the prophet’s ministry must have dated to a time before the Babylonians took on an international superpower rank. Habakkuk also must date before the three successive Babylonian invasions of Jerusalem (605, 597, and 586 BCE). Otherwise, Yahweh’s announcement would be a flash of the obvious and not a divine revelation.
The book opens with Habakkuk lamenting the poor spiritual health of Judah. It is unlikely the prophet would have complained about Judah’s disobedience to the law if he were writing during the reign of the righteous King Josiah (630-609 BCE). Josiah implemented many religious reforms, including the purging of the Assyrian cult from the land. Josiah also encouraged a return to the laws of Moses. In contrast, Habakkuk described the covenantal laws in his day as paralyzed. Most likely, he witnessed the reversal of Josiah’s reforms during the reign of King Jehoiakim (608-598 BCE). Although Jehoiakim was the son of Josiah, he disregarded the Torah laws and allowed for the return of idol worship.
Placing Habakkuk in the late seventh century BCE, during Jehoiakim’s reign, also means the book picks up where Nahum leaves off, chronologically. As Nahum predicted, the Assyrian Empire fell to the Babylonians with the destruction of Nineveh in 612 BCE. From there, the Babylonians conquered almost all of Assyria’s former vassals at a dizzying speed. By 605 BCE, the Babylonians had beaten the Egyptian army at Carchemish.
First complaint
Habakkuk 1 is a three-part dialogue. In the first section, Habakkuk was voicing his complaint to God, and God answered. Unsatisfied with the answer, Habakkuk lamented a second time. God answered again. Habakkuk’s book ends with the prophet being satisfied, even though his questions remain partially unanswered.
Habakkuk lamented, “O Lord, how long shall I cry for help, and you will not listen?” (1:2). Apparently, the prophet was waiting for an answer from God for some length of time already. If the book picks up at the middle point of a discussion with God, readers can only imply what the first part of the dialogue must have sounded like.
The “How long” lament is unusual language for the prophets, but it fits well within the tradition of the Psalms of lament. David, in the Psalms, cried out, “How long, O Lord? Will you forget me forever?” (13:1). Psalms 3 and 22 lamented with the same pleading tone for Yahweh to break his silence. In both Habakkuk and the Psalms, the intercessor pleads with Yahweh, not only to step in and save them personally but also to defend his Holy name.
Habakkuk described Judah’s lack of obedience to the covenant laws. According to the analysis of both Habakkuk and the prophet Jeremiah, contemporaries of each other, violence and injustice were widespread. The Torah had no claim on the spiritual life of Judah.
Habakkuk used six different synonyms to emphasize the darkness and depravity surrounding him (1:2-4). Curiously, Habakkuk did not specifically accuse any class of people. He only generalized that “justice never comes forth.” However, the book of Jeremiah gives historical color to Habakkuk’s poetic outline. Jeremiah blamed the monarchy, the courts, and the temple priests for the immorality that rivaled that of Sodom and Gomorrah (Jer. 23-26).
Perplexity overwhelmed Habakkuk. Why was Yahweh tolerating the situation? He asked God, “Why do you make me see wrongdoing and look at trouble?” (1:3). After all, a century before, when the Kingdom of Israel was guilty of violating the covenant, God had allowed Assyria to wipe them out. Why was Judah getting away with the same violations that led to Israel’s destruction and exile?
God’s answer
Without notification, the speaker shifts from Habakkuk’s question to Yahweh’s answer: “Look at the nations and see! Be astonished! Be astounded! For a work is being done in your days” (1:5). The reader detects the switch in perspective by the authoritative nature of the answer. In response to Habakkuk’s question about Judah’s disobedience, God promised Habakkuk that he would no longer permit Judah’s rebellion. Judgment was coming. Habakkuk lamented that his eyes had seen nothing but wrongdoing all around him. Yahweh responded by using the same two verbs the prophet had used but repurposing them: “Look at the nations and see!” (1:5). When Paul evangelized the synagogue at Antioch, he used Habakkuk’s same wake-up call language in a very different context as a warning against ignoring the power of the gospel message (Acts 13:41).
God revealed to Habakkuk that Judah’s judgment was coming through the Babylonian army. Yahweh preemptively took credit for their coming accomplishment, saying “For I am rousing the Chaldeans, that fierce and impetuous nation” (1:6). Chaldean is synonymous with Babylonian. The dynasty ruling from Babylon was Chaldean; Chaldean is a tribal name for Babylonian. Yahweh was not taking credit for the expanded list of Babylonian military victories abroad. He declared himself responsible for their coming invasion into Jerusalem.
Yahweh described the Babylonian army as swift destroyers of nations. Like circling vultures, the Babylonians had an insatiable appetite for bloodshed (1:8). Nahum described the Babylonians in the same vivid terms as Habakkuk and Jeremiah used, but in God’s case they were the instrument of judgment against Assyria, not Judah. Nahum apparently had no problem with the merciless practices of the Babylonians because it was all directed at the equally dread-inspiring Assyrians.
As the Babylonians overtook kingdoms, they installed puppet leaders who had no proper authority outside of Babylon’s control (1:10). However, Babylon’s most offensive crime, in the eyes of Yahweh, was how they credited their victories to their own power. Habakkuk wrote, “their own might is their god!” (1:11). Surely, God did not expect the Babylonians to be mindful of his hand in their victory over Judah. In the mind of an ancient Near Eastern person, gods were associated with cities, and therefore the conquering of a city was the humiliation of its god. Still, Yahweh, the self-revealing God, held their prideful lack of recognition against them.
Second complaint
In Habakkuk’s response, the prophet did not question Yahweh’s sovereignty or his power. He believed God was behind the coming Babylonian advance. He began his next prayer with a praise, reinforcing his full confidence in Yahweh. What Habakkuk found problematic were God’s methods. He appealed to God based on his character. Why would a holy God, “too pure to behold evil,” associate with the violent pagans like the Babylonians (1:13)?
Using a fishing metaphor, Habakkuk described the Babylonian army as fishermen and all of humanity as a teeming mass of fish with no leader. The Babylonians filled their nets, without pity for their prey and with no justification for their slaughter (1:17). In the ancient Near East, the image of conquered people captured in nets was a common motif, which the prophets also used. Amos had predicted that the Assyrians would take away the Israelites on fishhooks (4:2). In Jeremiah’s day of the Lord, God had summoned the fishermen to cast their nets (16:16). Habakkuk was most bothered, not by the rise and fall of nations, but by the constant violence begetting more violence. For Habakkuk, God’s participation in the endless cycle was a problem that he had yet to reconcile.
On the one hand, the prophet was seeking answers for his own personal faith about the trustworthiness of his God, whom he intimately called “my God” and “my Holy One” (1:13). However, as a prophet, he was also speaking on behalf of all the righteous remaining in Judah, who were asking the same question of Yahweh. Are not the wicked in Judah still better than the Babylonians? Why would God punish one disobedient people by using a much more wicked people? Habakkuk probed, “Why do you look on the treacherous, and are silent when the wicked swallow those more righteous than they?” (1:13).
Was God, whom Habakkuk knew to be both just and merciful, being inconsistent? The prophet’s challenge to God extended further than that of other prophets. Hosea, Amos, and Micah, who all served as God’s messengers, had accused the people of Israel and Judah of breaking their covenant promises. Habakkuk earnestly wanted to know how God could justify raising up Babylon against his nation, in the light of his own covenant obligations, at least to the righteous of Judah.
Habakkuk’s message was like Job’s lament (6:28-30). Both men were firm in their belief in God’s sovereignty, but they grappled with theological questions. Both men defended God’s righteousness despite the existence of evil. Habakkuk and Job were the systematic theologians of their own day, long before seminaries had even coined the title.
Habakkuk was not being disrespectful in his questioning of God’s methods. He was earnestly seeking divine revelation. If any Bible reader is honest, they also have questions about God’s handling of historic events. We should all be thankful for the prophet who gave voice to those concerns.
God did not answer Habakkuk with a rebuke for having challenged his ways; instead, he answered Habakkuk with revelation and gentleness wrapped in mystery.
As believers in the same God that dialogued with Habakkuk, we also can prayerfully approach the throne room when our own understanding of Yahweh’s righteousness does not square with the perpetuation of violence, we are witnessing in our own world right now. Some Christians misunderstand the God of the Hebrew Scriptures as a remote deity, and they believe that God did not transform into an intimate presence until Jesus came to earth. Hopefully, in your reading of Habakkuk, you can see the long story of God extending himself to humanity, not just to nations, but to individuals.