728x90
3 Then the word of the Lord came fby the hand of Haggai the prophet, 4 g“Is it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while hthis house lies in ruins? 5 Now, therefore, thus says the Lord of hosts: iConsider your ways. 6 jYou have sown much, and harvested little. kYou eat, but you never have enough; you drink, but you never have your fill. You clothe yourselves, but no one is warm. And he who learns wages does so to put them into a bag with holes.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 1:3–6.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 1:3–6.
3절) 1절과 같은 형식으로 여호와의 말씀이 선지자 학개에게 임하였다라고 선언한다. 이는 이 선포의 주도권이 하나님께 있음을, 그리고 선지자는 그 통로임을 강조한다.
- The claim of divine authority made in v. 1 is now repeated in v. 3 in essentially the same terms. By repeating this formula the prophet stresses the belief that his message did not originate by his initiative, nor was its harsh analysis the result of his personal reflections. The prophet’s audience is exhorted to hear the voice of the Lord in his words to them.
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 121.
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 121.
4절) 여호와의 전은 황무한 곳에 있는데 이스라엘 백성들은 판벽한 집, 좋은 집에 거하는 것이 옳으냐라고 물으신다. 이것은 결국 신앙의 우선순위의 문제이다. 우리의 본성은 우리 자신, 개인의 안전과 안정을 추구하는데 신앙은 우리에게 거칠고 좁은 길을 향해 나아갈 것을 요구한다. 삼하 7:2에서 다윗은 반대의 질문을 한다.
(삼하 7:2, 개정) 『왕이 선지자 나단에게 이르되 볼지어다 나는 백향목 궁에 살거늘 하나님의 궤는 휘장 가운데에 있도다』
- The question invites reflection on priorities. Whose interests were most important to them—their own or those of their God? It is a question with which believing communities have often had to struggle. To answer the question properly requires breaking with the familiar and comfortable patterns of the past and turning to God with urgent sincerity.72 The New Testament counterpart to this lamentable attitude is expressed by the apostle Paul: “For everyone looks out for his own interests, not those of Jesus Christ” (Phil 2:21).
72 J. G. Baldwin aptly speaks of “the dangerous state of moral paralysis which accepts as normal conditions that demand drastic changes” (Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC [Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1972], 27).
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 122.
72 J. G. Baldwin aptly speaks of “the dangerous state of moral paralysis which accepts as normal conditions that demand drastic changes” (Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC [Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 1972], 27).
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 122.
본문에 사용된 집과 전이라는 단어는 의도적으로 동일한 단어(bayit)이 사용되었다. 원래 성전을 의미할때는 헤칼(hekal)이라는 단어가 사용되지만 지금 선지자는 의도적으로 집이라는 단어를 사용함을 통해서 백성들의 부적절한 우선순위를 꼬집고 있다.
본문에 여호와의 전은 황무하였고 백성들의 집은 판벽한 집이라고 대조하고 있는데 이 단어들이 의미를 좀더 보면 다음과 같다.
황무함의 의미는 물리적으로 무너져버렸음을 의미하기도 하고 또한 더이상 제 기능을 하지 못하고 사람들이 찾지 않는 성전의 모습을 의미할 수도 있다.
- In v. 4 Haggai speaks of the “covered” houses in which the people live.75 The specific nuance of sĕpûnîm in this description is not entirely clear.76 Is the prophet referring to lavish expenditures for houses with interior paneling made of costly material (so apparently NIV), and if so, how does this relate to the economic hard times in which they were living? Given the mess the economy was in, as described in vv. 5–11, one wonders where money for such elaborate spending would have come from. Or does Haggai merely mean houses that are “roofed,” in contrast to the demolished temple structure that had no such cover? The Hebrew word sĕpûnîm in v. 4 has been understood both ways.
The root spn basically means “to cover”; the precise nuance can only be determined by context. Related nouns include sippun, “ceiling” (1 Kgs 6:15), referring to the overhead covering of a building, and sĕpînâ, “ship” (Jonah 1:5), referring to a seagoing vessel with covered decks and space for storing cargo below. In its six Old Testament occurrences the verbal root spn refers to the closing in of Solomon’s temple with beams for roofing (1 Kgs 6:9),77 or to the paneling of Solomon’s palace with such expensive items as cedar (1 Kgs 7:3, 7; Jer 22:14). In these passages the emphasis is on the extravagance and wealth represented by such expensive coverings. On one occasion (Deut 33:21) the word has the derived sense of “reserved” or “laid up,” referring to the allocation of the best portion of land for the leader. In Deut 33:19 the word has the sense of “hidden” or “concealed” (though here the root is spelled śpn).
The word sĕpûnîm in Hag 1:4 likely refers to the covering of interior walls with paneling, having in mind primarily the practice of the well-to-do few rather than that of the financially hard-pressed majority.78 It may be significant in this regard that it is the governor and the high priest who are specifically singled out in this first sermon (1:1). Haggai’s point is that while some of the people live in comfortable, convenient, and even lavishly appointed dwellings,79 the temple of God by contrast lies in rubble and is the object of disinterest and neglect on the part of the people.80
In contrast to the nicely decorated houses of at least some of the people, the Lord’s house “remains a ruin.” The Hebrew word for “ruin” is ḥārēb (cf. v. 9, where the idea is repeated). This adjective is used sometimes in the Hebrew Bible with the sense of “dry” in reference to a grain offering (Lev 7:10) or a morsel of food (Prov 17:1). Other times it is used with the sense of “devastated,” “desolate,” or “in ruins” in reference to a city (Ezek 36:35; 36:38) or a place (Jer 33:12). The specific nuance of the word when used of the temple is disputed. There are two main views. Some scholars take the word to describe the temple as a deserted or abandoned facility that at this time saw no use. In this view the word ḥārēb in v. 4 does not point to the physical condition of the temple, as though it were lying in ruins.81 Rather, it refers to the isolated and uninhabited condition of this structure. Other scholars have taken this occurrence of the word to describe a condition of physical destruction and ruin,82 not merely a condition of desertion and absence of human occupation.83 This need not imply that the structure in Haggai’s day was completely obliterated or devoid of any recognizable feature whatsoever, since it seems clear from Ezra 3:2–3 that sacrifices were being offered on a rebuilt altar. But in light of Haggai’s insistence of rebuilding, it is likely that in v. 4 ḥārēb assumes some degree of physical destruction and disrepair.
75 That the Hb. infinitive used here (שֶׁבֶת, “to sit,” “dwell”) forms a merism with the participle in v. 9 (רָצִים, “running”), as suggested by Meyers and Meyers (Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 23, 30), is not entirely clear to me. If the words are in fact to be taken as a merism, the sense would be that in all of their activities (whether sitting or running) it is self-advantage the people are seeking.
76 In 1:4 the MT סְפוּנִים (“covered”) lacks the definite article, although the preceding expression (בְּבָתֵּיכֶם, “in your houses”) is definite by virtue of having a pronominal suffix. We would expect agreement in definiteness between the noun and the adjective that modifies it. The construction in the MT is somewhat awkward but not impossible from a grammatical standpoint. The adjectival participle can be explained as an accusative of state that may then be translated as “in your houses (which are at present) paneled”; see GBH §127a. This understanding seems preferable to the suggestion of Waltke and O’Connor that the word is an accusative of specification (“in your houses with paneling”), although the difference in emphasis is slight; see IBHS §14.3.3c. On the other hand, the possibility of textual error in the MT cannot be completely ruled out. Some MSS of the LXX (e.g., A, Q, and a corrected hand of S) lack the possessive pronoun (ἡμῶν, “you”) in v. 4, as is also true of Tg. Jonathan and the Vg. In order to gain the expected agreement between the participle and the noun, some scholars have therefore proposed emending the definite בְּבַתֵּיכֶם to the indefinite בְּבָתּים. In that case the letter kaph of the pronominal suffix in the MT may be due to dittography.
77 The precise meaning of גֶּב (“beams”?) in 1 Kgs 6:9 is uncertain; the word is a hapax legomenon. It probably refers to a beam or rafter (so BDB, 155), but some scholars have taken it to refer to a coffer or recess in a paneled ceiling (so DCH 2:297).
78 D. R. Slavitt, e.g., translates the phrase as “your wainscoted houses” (The Book of the Twelve Prophets [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000], 103).
79 R. Mason takes a more restrictive interpretation of סְפוּנִים than the one suggested here, concluding that the word “probably suggests something a good deal more makeshift than the ‘paneled’ of most Eng. versions” (“Haggai: Theology of,” NIDOTTE 4 [1997]: 691). In a similar way Meyers and Meyers understand the word not to imply richness but to denote “the final stage of construction work when the wooden finishing, whether laid across stone or wooden walls, has been completed” (Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 23).
80 This ancient problem is not without its modern counterpart. Excessive discretionary spending on personal interests, accompanied by paltry giving to the work of God, continues to the present. As Baldwin reminds us, “The conflict between expenditure on luxury homes and worthy support of God’s work is still with us” (Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, 40).
81 See Amsler, “Aggée, Zacharie 1–8,” 22; Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 24, Kessler, The Book of Haggai, 128–30.
82 See DCH 3:306; HALOT, 349.
83 F. I. Andersen’s comment does not seem to me to capture adequately the nuance of this word in Haggai: “Haggai’s complaint is not that the house of God is not in existence, but that it is deserted. It is not that the people are building their own homes and not building the temple, it is that they sit in their homes when they should be working in the temple, and they run off home when they should be in church” (“Who Built the Second Temple?” ABR 6 [1958]: 25).
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 123–125.
The root spn basically means “to cover”; the precise nuance can only be determined by context. Related nouns include sippun, “ceiling” (1 Kgs 6:15), referring to the overhead covering of a building, and sĕpînâ, “ship” (Jonah 1:5), referring to a seagoing vessel with covered decks and space for storing cargo below. In its six Old Testament occurrences the verbal root spn refers to the closing in of Solomon’s temple with beams for roofing (1 Kgs 6:9),77 or to the paneling of Solomon’s palace with such expensive items as cedar (1 Kgs 7:3, 7; Jer 22:14). In these passages the emphasis is on the extravagance and wealth represented by such expensive coverings. On one occasion (Deut 33:21) the word has the derived sense of “reserved” or “laid up,” referring to the allocation of the best portion of land for the leader. In Deut 33:19 the word has the sense of “hidden” or “concealed” (though here the root is spelled śpn).
The word sĕpûnîm in Hag 1:4 likely refers to the covering of interior walls with paneling, having in mind primarily the practice of the well-to-do few rather than that of the financially hard-pressed majority.78 It may be significant in this regard that it is the governor and the high priest who are specifically singled out in this first sermon (1:1). Haggai’s point is that while some of the people live in comfortable, convenient, and even lavishly appointed dwellings,79 the temple of God by contrast lies in rubble and is the object of disinterest and neglect on the part of the people.80
In contrast to the nicely decorated houses of at least some of the people, the Lord’s house “remains a ruin.” The Hebrew word for “ruin” is ḥārēb (cf. v. 9, where the idea is repeated). This adjective is used sometimes in the Hebrew Bible with the sense of “dry” in reference to a grain offering (Lev 7:10) or a morsel of food (Prov 17:1). Other times it is used with the sense of “devastated,” “desolate,” or “in ruins” in reference to a city (Ezek 36:35; 36:38) or a place (Jer 33:12). The specific nuance of the word when used of the temple is disputed. There are two main views. Some scholars take the word to describe the temple as a deserted or abandoned facility that at this time saw no use. In this view the word ḥārēb in v. 4 does not point to the physical condition of the temple, as though it were lying in ruins.81 Rather, it refers to the isolated and uninhabited condition of this structure. Other scholars have taken this occurrence of the word to describe a condition of physical destruction and ruin,82 not merely a condition of desertion and absence of human occupation.83 This need not imply that the structure in Haggai’s day was completely obliterated or devoid of any recognizable feature whatsoever, since it seems clear from Ezra 3:2–3 that sacrifices were being offered on a rebuilt altar. But in light of Haggai’s insistence of rebuilding, it is likely that in v. 4 ḥārēb assumes some degree of physical destruction and disrepair.
75 That the Hb. infinitive used here (שֶׁבֶת, “to sit,” “dwell”) forms a merism with the participle in v. 9 (רָצִים, “running”), as suggested by Meyers and Meyers (Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 23, 30), is not entirely clear to me. If the words are in fact to be taken as a merism, the sense would be that in all of their activities (whether sitting or running) it is self-advantage the people are seeking.
76 In 1:4 the MT סְפוּנִים (“covered”) lacks the definite article, although the preceding expression (בְּבָתֵּיכֶם, “in your houses”) is definite by virtue of having a pronominal suffix. We would expect agreement in definiteness between the noun and the adjective that modifies it. The construction in the MT is somewhat awkward but not impossible from a grammatical standpoint. The adjectival participle can be explained as an accusative of state that may then be translated as “in your houses (which are at present) paneled”; see GBH §127a. This understanding seems preferable to the suggestion of Waltke and O’Connor that the word is an accusative of specification (“in your houses with paneling”), although the difference in emphasis is slight; see IBHS §14.3.3c. On the other hand, the possibility of textual error in the MT cannot be completely ruled out. Some MSS of the LXX (e.g., A, Q, and a corrected hand of S) lack the possessive pronoun (ἡμῶν, “you”) in v. 4, as is also true of Tg. Jonathan and the Vg. In order to gain the expected agreement between the participle and the noun, some scholars have therefore proposed emending the definite בְּבַתֵּיכֶם to the indefinite בְּבָתּים. In that case the letter kaph of the pronominal suffix in the MT may be due to dittography.
77 The precise meaning of גֶּב (“beams”?) in 1 Kgs 6:9 is uncertain; the word is a hapax legomenon. It probably refers to a beam or rafter (so BDB, 155), but some scholars have taken it to refer to a coffer or recess in a paneled ceiling (so DCH 2:297).
78 D. R. Slavitt, e.g., translates the phrase as “your wainscoted houses” (The Book of the Twelve Prophets [Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000], 103).
79 R. Mason takes a more restrictive interpretation of סְפוּנִים than the one suggested here, concluding that the word “probably suggests something a good deal more makeshift than the ‘paneled’ of most Eng. versions” (“Haggai: Theology of,” NIDOTTE 4 [1997]: 691). In a similar way Meyers and Meyers understand the word not to imply richness but to denote “the final stage of construction work when the wooden finishing, whether laid across stone or wooden walls, has been completed” (Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 23).
80 This ancient problem is not without its modern counterpart. Excessive discretionary spending on personal interests, accompanied by paltry giving to the work of God, continues to the present. As Baldwin reminds us, “The conflict between expenditure on luxury homes and worthy support of God’s work is still with us” (Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, 40).
81 See Amsler, “Aggée, Zacharie 1–8,” 22; Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 24, Kessler, The Book of Haggai, 128–30.
82 See DCH 3:306; HALOT, 349.
83 F. I. Andersen’s comment does not seem to me to capture adequately the nuance of this word in Haggai: “Haggai’s complaint is not that the house of God is not in existence, but that it is deserted. It is not that the people are building their own homes and not building the temple, it is that they sit in their homes when they should be working in the temple, and they run off home when they should be in church” (“Who Built the Second Temple?” ABR 6 [1958]: 25).
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 123–125.
4절의 황무함을 나타내는 hareb과 11절의 한재, 가뭄을 나타내는 horeb는 저자의 의도된 워드 플레이다. 본 단어는 모두 황무함, ruin을 의미하는 동일한 어근에서 나왔다.
- The use of the word ḥārēb in v. 4 sets up a wordplay, forming a semantic link to v. 11, where the word for “drought” is the cognate noun ḥōreb. Haggai thus connects the “ruin” of the temple to the “ruin” of the land. The relationship, as will be made even more clear in the verses that follow, is one of cause and effect. It is precisely because of the people’s inactivity with regard to the temple that the Lord sent hard times to the land.84 From the prophet’s point of view the Lord had demonstrated his covenantal faithfulness by bringing the Jews into favor with Cyrus, who permitted them to return to their homeland. Now the time had come for the people to demonstrate their covenantal faithfulness to the Lord by seeing to it that his temple was rebuilt in Jerusalem. Yet this is precisely where they had failed. In Haggai’s theology acceptance of human responsibility is an essential part of the outworking of divine purposes within the believing community. Conversely, recalcitrant rejection of that responsibility invites divine judgment.85
84 J. A. Bewer has called attention to ANE parallels to Haggai’s linkage of famine and temple building. He points to certain similarities between Haggai and the Gudea inscriptions with regard to the concepts of temple and the ushering in of a golden age; see “Ancient Babylonian Parallels to the Prophecies of Haggai,” AJSL 35 (1919): 128–33.
85 In terms of biblical theology God usually accomplishes his purposes through the committed efforts of a redeemed community. When that community fails in its responsibility, the work of God suffers as a consequence. As W. A. VanGemeren puts it, “The canonical function of Haggai clearly points the way in which God’s people must participate to bring in the kingdom of God” (Interpreting the Prophetic Word [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990], 192).
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 125.
84 J. A. Bewer has called attention to ANE parallels to Haggai’s linkage of famine and temple building. He points to certain similarities between Haggai and the Gudea inscriptions with regard to the concepts of temple and the ushering in of a golden age; see “Ancient Babylonian Parallels to the Prophecies of Haggai,” AJSL 35 (1919): 128–33.
85 In terms of biblical theology God usually accomplishes his purposes through the committed efforts of a redeemed community. When that community fails in its responsibility, the work of God suffers as a consequence. As W. A. VanGemeren puts it, “The canonical function of Haggai clearly points the way in which God’s people must participate to bring in the kingdom of God” (Interpreting the Prophetic Word [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1990], 192).
Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 125.
5절) 이렇게 우선순위가 바뀌어 있는 상황속에서 나타나는 일들에 대해서 제대로 돌아보고 평가해볼 것을 말한다.
6절) 본문은 5가지측면에서의 경제적인 실패를 보여준다.
1) 많이 뿌리지만 많이 거두지 못함
2) 먹어도 배부리지 못함, 충분히 먹지 못함
3) 마시지만 충분히 마시지 못하여 목마름
4) 옷을 입지만 그 옷의 질이 나쁘고, 제대로 입지 못하여 따뜻하지 않음
5) 일을 하여 삯을 받지만 구멍난 주머니에서 그 동전이 없어짐
- 본문을 통해서 당시 유대 문화권에서도 동전을 사용하였다는 것을 알 수 있다.
'성경묵상 > 학개' 카테고리의 다른 글
| 학 2:1-9 장래 임할 성전의 영광 (0) | 2017.01.17 |
|---|---|
| 학 1:12-15 우리의 마음을 흥분시키시는 하나님 (0) | 2017.01.16 |
| 학 1:7-11 무엇을 위해서 달리는가? (0) | 2017.01.12 |
| 학 1:1-2 학개에게 임한 여호와의 말씀 (0) | 2017.01.10 |
| 학개(개요) (0) | 2017.01.09 |