728x90
Zerubbabel Chosen as a Signet
20 The word of the Lord came a second time to Haggai fon the twenty-fourth day of the month, 21 “Speak to jZerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, kI am about to shake the heavens and the earth, 22 and lto overthrow the throne of kingdoms. I am about to destroy the strength of the kingdoms of the nations, and moverthrow the chariots and their riders. And the horses and their riders shall go down, nevery one by the sword of his brother. 23 On that day, declares the Lord of hosts, I will take you, O jZerubbabel omy servant, the son of pShealtiel, declares the Lord, and make you qlike a3 signet ring, ofor I have chosen you, declares the Lord of hosts.”

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 2:20–23.

20절) 그달(9월) 24일 여호와의 말씀이 다시 학개에게 임함. 
-As in 2:10, the Lord’s word is said to come “to” (ʾel) Haggai rather than “by the hand of” (bĕyad) Haggai (cf. 1:3; 2:1). As noted earlier, the difference in meaning between the two expressions is slight. The preposition ʾel portrays Haggai as a passive recipient of divine revelation, while bĕyad shifts attention to the prophet as an active agent in the communication of that message. But the important thing is that it is the Lord’s message. Haggai is simply a chosen messenger.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 192.

21-22절) 유다 총독 스룹바벨에게 여호와 하나님으로부터의 임박한 심판을 고하심. 하늘과 땅을 진동시키시고 열국의 보좌를 엎고 열방의 세력을 멸하심. 그 병거들과 그 탄 자들을 엎드러뜨림으로 말과 그 탄자가 각각 그 동무의 칼에 엎드러지게 될 것을 선포하심. 본문의 임박한 하나님의 심판에 대한 경고는 출애굽의 상황을 연상케 한다. 본문은 여호와 하나님이 주체로 이 심판을 행할 것임을 거듭 강조하고 있다. 
- The first person verbs in v. 22 speak of violence that originates not in fortuitous events of nature but with intentional divine decisions. The repeated use of the first person is vivid: “I will overturn,” “I will shatter,” “I will overthrow.” The sovereign Lord credits himself with the foreboding acts of judgment described here. Such language calls to mind certain prior Old Testament scenes that provide the poetic imagery and visual backdrop for this oracle.7 In Gen 19:25 the Lord “overthrew” (same verb as “overturn” here) Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding plain (cf. Isa 13:19; Jer 20:16; Amos 4:11; Deut 29:23). The Song of Moses speaks of Pharaoh’s horses and riders, along with his chariots and army, being hurled into the sea as a result of the Lord’s decisive intervention at the time of the exodus (Exod 15:1, 4, 19, 21). Haggai also speaks of the overthrow of royal thrones, the shattering of the power of foreign kingdoms,8 and the overthrow of chariots and their drivers. The similarity of language is not coincidental.
7 Haggai’s language may also reflect here, as D. L. Petersen (following Sauer) suggests, some allusion to the judgmental language of national destruction as found in Psalms 2 and 110 (Haggai and Zechariah 1–8: A Commentary, OTL [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984], 100).
8 The second colon of 2:22 seems a bit overloaded due to the two genitives dependent on חֹזֶק (“strength”). The NIV translates the clause “[I will] shatter the power of the foreign kingdoms.” A more literal translation is, “And I will destroy the power of the kingdoms of the nations.” Some scholars regard מַמְלְכוֹת (“kingdoms”), which also occurs just three words earlier, as a gloss that may have originated as a variant to the word הַגּוֹיִם (“the nations”). But there is no MSS evidence to support this view. In spite of the awkwardness of the phrase, it seems best to retain מַמְלְכוֹת as in the MT. The twofold occurrence of מֱמְלְכוֹת (“kingdoms”) may in fact serve a purpose. C. L. Meyers and E. M. Meyers have suggested that a subtle distinction may be intended in this use of similar phraseology: “ ‘Throne of kingdoms’ may refer to the ruler or dynast controlling all the kingdoms composing the empire, with ‘foreign kingdoms’ (literally, ‘kingdoms of nations’) representing the constituent polities” (Haggai, Zechariah 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB [New York: Doubleday, 1987], 67).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 193–194.

23절) 그날에 만군의 여호와께서 스알디엘의 아들 스룹바벨에게 말씀하신다. 내 종이라고 부르시며 내가 너를 취하고 너로 인장 반지를 삼으리니 이는 내가 너를 택하였음이다라고 말씀하심. 하나님의 주권적인 선택을 매우 강력하게 표현하고 있다. 
- Zerubbabel is singled out as a key player not only in the reconstruction of the temple but also in the anticipated future of the Davidic kingdom. The mention of a historical figure by name in an eschatological setting is unusual,18 although certain references to David elsewhere in the Old Testament may have some similarity to this reference to Zerubbabel.19 The setting of v. 23 is established by the phrase bayyôm hahûʾ (“on that day”). This phrase is frequently used with an eschatological nuance in Old Testament prophetic literature.20
The language of v. 23 is characterized by terminology emphasizing unilateral divine selection, such as “I will take you,” “my servant,” and “I have chosen you.” The piling up of such language in a short space signals that unusual events are being described. The Hebrew verb lāqaḥ (“to take”) often has a very general sense, but here it is used with the specific nuance of selecting or choosing, a usage that is attested elsewhere for this verb.21 The language of v. 23 is similar to that of 1 Kgs 11:37, where the Lord addresses the following words to Jeroboam: “However, as for you, I will take you [wʾōtĕkā ʾeqqaḥ], and you will rule over all that your heart desires; you will be king over Israel.” The Lord will “take” (ʾeqqāḥăkā) Zerubbabel in the sense that he has chosen him for a unique role in connection with the momentous events described in this passage.
The term ʿabdî (“my servant”), which occurs in v. 23, is common in the Hebrew Bible. It is often used of those whom the Lord has appointed to a particular task, whether from among his people or the pagan nations.22 But ʿabdî is especially used as a designation of David as king, either in reference to the historical person of David or an eschatological figure who will be David-like.

18 Meyers and Meyers regard this phenomenon as unique, constituting “the only case in the Hebrew Bible in which an eschatological prophecy is focused upon a known historical figure” (Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 15, 68). See also S. Japhet, “Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel—Against the Background of the Historical and Religious Tendencies of Ezra-Nehemiah,” ZAW 94 (1982): 77.
19 See, e.g., Hos 3:5, where the expression “David their king” has in view not David specifically but a descendant in the Davidic line. Cf. Jer 30:9; Ezek 34:23–24.
20 The expression בַּיּוֹמ הַהוּא occurs more than two hundred times in the Hb. Bible, often in an eschatological sense. Among the prophets Isaiah is especially fond of this expression, using it some forty-five times. Jeremiah uses this expression ten times; Ezekiel thirteen times; Hosea four times; Joel once; Amos five times; Obadiah once; Micah three times; Zephaniah four times; Zechariah twenty-two times.
21 See, e.g., Deut 1:15, 23; 4:20, 34; Josh 3:12; 4:2; 1 Kgs 11:37.
22 The phrase “my servant” is used, e.g., of the following individuals: Abraham (Gen 26:24); Jacob (Isa 43:10; 44:1, 2; 44:21; 49:3; 52:13; 53:11; Jer 3:10; 46:27, 28; Ezek 28:25; 37:25); Moses (Num 12:7, 8; Josh 1:2, 7; 2 Kgs 21:8; Mal 3:22); Caleb (Num 14:24); David (2 Sam 3:18; 7:5, 8; 1 Kgs 11:13, 32, 34, 36, 38; 14:8; Isa 37:35; Jer 33:21, 22, 26; Ezek 34:23, 24; 36:26; 37:24; Ps 89:4, 21; 1 Chr 17:4, 7); Naaman (2 Kgs 5:6); Isaiah (Isa 20:3); Eliakim (Isa 22:20); Israel (Isa 41:8, 9; 42:1, 19); Nebuchadnezzar (Jer 25:9; 27:6; 43:10); the Branch (Zech 3:8); Job (Job 1:8; 2:3; 31:13; 42:7, 8[2x]). Other permutations of this expression also appear (e.g., “servant,” “your servant,” “his servant,” “servant of the Lord”).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 195–196.

인장 반지의 비유는 고대 근동에서 주권과 권위를 상징한다. 결국 스룹바벨이 신적 권위를 부여받은 다윗의 계보임을 강조한다. 
- Haggai’s ring imagery is especially striking in this context.27 The signet ring was a common emblem of ownership and authority in the ancient Near East; it was used for the authentication of such things as royal directives or legal documents.28 Missives of this sort were typically sealed with a piece of clay impressed with the distinctive and identifying marks of the ring (cf. Jer 32:9–15). Such a ring normally was worn either suspended on a cord around the neck (cf. Gen 38:18) or placed on a finger of the right hand (cf. Jer 22:24), although it could be displayed on one’s arm as well (cf. Song 8:6).29 In Hag 2:23 the signet ring figuratively portrays Zerubbabel as one who uniquely represented divine authority and who appeared as the Lord’s coregent.30
27 It would be hard to improve on J. A. Motyer’s apt description of this section: “The final verses of his book reveal Haggai as the literary equivalent of an impressionist painter—he gives general tone and effect without elaborate detail. His colors are the thunderstorm and the earthquake (2:21), revolution (2:22a), clashing armies (2:22b–c), and civil conflict (2:22d). As in a carefully composed picture, where every stroke is designed to lead the eye to what is central, so here too the focus is like a shaft of sunlight illuminating one item—a ring shining on a finger (2:23)” (“Haggai,” in The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998], 3:1000).
28 On the use of seals in general in the ANE see M. Gibson and R. D. Biggs, eds., Seals and Sealing in the Ancient Near East, BMes 6 (Malibu: Undena, 1977).
29 That the signet ring was worn on one’s person in order to prevent its theft or unauthorized use, as P. A. Verhoef suggests, is not entirely clear (The Books of Haggai and Malachi, NICOT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987], 147). One can just as easily imagine that the signet ring may have been worn so that its owner might have convenient and ready access to it. In some instances there may also have been social advantages associated with having this emblem of authority clearly in public view.
30 In v. 23 Tg. Jonathan expands the reference to Zerubbabel as a “signet ring” (חוֹתָם) to “the engraving (or setting) of a signet ring upon the hand” (כגלף דעזקא על יד), thus making the idea a bit more specific than it is in the MT.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 197–198.

본문은 이렇게 막을 내린다. 그렇다면 실제로 스룹바벨은 어떤 역할을 했는가? 그가 실제로 영광스러운 승리의 열매를 거두지는 못했다. 하지만 마태와 누가는 메시야의 계보에 스룹바벨을 언급한다. 히브리서 기자도 이렇게 증언한다.(히 11:39)
(히 11:39, 개정) 『이 사람들은 다 믿음으로 말미암아 증거를 받았으나 약속된 것을 받지 못하였으니』
신약의 주님의 재림에 대한 예언도 이와 마찬가지이다. 예언의 성취를 기다리지만 아직 완성되지 않았다고 해서 이것이 예언의 신적인 정당성을 무력화 시킬 수는 없다. 

- The magnitude of these promises to Zerubbabel poses an exegetical problem. Were these pronouncements actually fulfilled in Zerubbabel? Did he usher in a restoration of Israelite monarchy that was accompanied by the overthrow of Gentile nations in the fashion that Haggai describes?32 The history of this period provides no evidence that he did so. Haggai’s promises did not come to fruition in the person of Zerubbabel. On the contrary, not long after this prophecy was given, Zerubbabel dropped into obscurity and passed off the scene. History is silent about what became of him or under what conditions he concluded his life. Whether he was removed from office by the Persians out of concern over possible insurrection in Judah,33 or died while in office, or continued to govern for a period of time is unknown.34
What is clear is that Zerubbabel did not usher in a triumphant period of rule such as vv. 20–23 describe. According to some scholars Haggai’s grand predictions concerning Zerubbabel turned out to be a dismal failure.35 What the prophet thought would take place did not occur.36 Haggai’s predictions are therefore regarded by some scholars as an instance of prophecy failing to come to fruition, a case of what has been called cognitive dissonance within the prophetic literature.37
A better understanding of this matter lies in viewing Zerubbabel as a representative figure.38 Just as the name David could carry associations of a royal figure who is in the Davidic line but who transcends the historical figure of David, so it is with Zerubbabel.39 This governor of Judah represented a renewal of divine pleasure in a people who had returned from the disciplinary experience of the exile—a people whom the Lord was once again pleased to acknowledge and for whom he had great plans. Like many other Old Testament promises, these predictions had both a near dimension and a more distant one. Haggai’s promises given to Zerubbabel, while true of him in a limited way, find their ultimate expression in a greater Zerubbabel who was to come.40 It is not surprising that in the genealogies of Jesus provided by Matthew and Luke, Zerubbabel is mentioned as part of the messianic line.41
That Haggai himself necessarily expected a delayed fulfillment of his words is not likely. He had no way of anticipating the temporal distances that might exist between prediction and fulfillment. As the writer to the Hebrews says of past heroes of the faith, “These were all commended for their faith, yet none of them received what had been promised” (Heb 11:39). In that regard Haggai was no different from New Testament writers who expected the prophecies of Jesus’ return to have a sooner rather than later fulfillment. They could not have anticipated the measure of time that separated their predictions from historical fulfillment. Such temporal distance, however, does not negate the validity of their prophecies. It merely confirms that at times they spoke of profound mysteries that were beyond their ability fully to comprehend.


저작자표시

'성경묵상 > 학개' 카테고리의 다른 글

학 2:10-19 부정한 우리들에게 복을 약속하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.18
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 1:3-6 황무한 집에 거하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.11
728x90
Blessings for a Defiled People
10 tOn the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, uin the second year of Darius, the word of the Lord came by Haggai the prophet, 11 “Thus says the Lord of hosts: vAsk the priests about the law: 12 ‘If someone carries wholy meat in the fold of his garment and touches with his fold bread or stew or wine or oil or any kind of food, does it become holy?’ ” The priests answered and said, x“No.” 13 Then Haggai said, y“If someone who is unclean by contact with a dead body ztouches any of these, does it become unclean?” The priests answered and said, “It does become unclean.” 14 Then Haggai answered and said, a“So is it with this people, and with this nation before me, declares the Lord, and so with every work of their hands. And what they offer there is unclean. 15 Now then, bconsider from this day onward.1 Before stone was placed upon stone in the temple of the Lord, 16 how did you fare? cWhen2 one came to a heap of twenty measures, there were but ten. When one came to the wine vat to draw fifty measures, there were but twenty. 17 dI struck you and all the products of your toil with blight and with mildew and with hail, eyet you did not turn to me, declares the Lord. 18 bConsider from this day onward, ffrom the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Since gthe day that the foundation of the Lord’s temple was laid, bconsider: 19 hIs the seed yet in the barn? Indeed, the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree have yielded nothing. But from this day on iI will bless you.”

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 2:10–19.

10절) 다리오왕 2년 9월 24일 여호와의 말씀이 선지자 학개에게 임함, 앞선 본문과 비교할때 다시 2개월정도의 시간이 지난 상태임을 알 수 있다. 이는 연대기적으로 사건이 진행됨을 밝히고 동시에 이 메시지의 기원이 하나님으로 부터임을 강조한다. 반면에 앞선 선포때와는 다르게 스룹바벨과 여호수아는 언급되지 않는다. 
- This introduction provides two important pieces of background information. First, it indicates the chronological setting of the sermon. Second, it identifies the human messenger as a recipient of the divine word. Unlike Haggai’s previous messages, neither Zerubbabel nor Joshua is specifically mentioned.
The date of this sermon is “the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius.” The ninth month is Kislev. The modern equivalent of this date is December 18, 520 B.C. The date holds no special significance in terms of celebration of an Old Testament feast day or commemoration of an earlier historical event.

Unlike the previous sermons, here (and later in v. 20) the word of the Lord is said to come “to” (ʾel) Haggai rather than “by [his] hand” (bĕyad). This difference is mainly stylistic, although in the former expression the emphasis may be more on Haggai as the receptor of the divine message and in the latter expression the emphasis may be more on Haggai as the intermediate agent through whom the people received the divine message.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 170-171.

11절) 제사장에게 율법에 대하여 묻기를 명하시는 여호와 하나님
- The presence of this priestly community and the acknowledgment of their religious authority may provide insight into why some of Haggai’s contemporaries felt justified in neglecting the rebuilding of the temple. Perhaps there were those who wondered whether the temple was really essential, since there could be sacrifice, offerings, and priestly exposition of Torah apart from the temple.9
This passage also provides insight into how postexilic prophetic and priestly communities functioned together,10 since here the prophet defers to the priests for a decision regarding cultic purity.11 There is an implicit recognition of priestly authority in such matters.12 The situation described in vv. 11–14 is unique in that sense; nowhere else in the Hebrew Bible is there a parallel example of priests making a similar judgment.13 It was to prophets that the Lord communicated fresh disclosures of the divine will either for their own age or for the future. But it was priests who were recognized as being uniquely qualified to provide a ruling on matters of cultic purity by virtue of their role as trusted custodians of the Mosaic law.14 Malachi 2:7–9 sheds light on the priestly function Haggai alludes to here:
“For the lips of a priest ought to preserve knowledge, and from his mouth men should seek instruction—because he is the messenger of the Lord Almighty. But you have turned from the way and by your teaching have caused many to stumble; you have violated the covenant with Levi,” says the Lord Almighty. “So I have caused you to be despised and humiliated before all the people, because you have not followed my ways but have shown partiality in matters of the law.”
The distinctions alluded to in Jer 18:18 (ESV) are also instructive in this regard:
For the law shall not perish from the priest, nor counsel from the wise, nor the word from the prophet.15
Although there is overlap in the domains described in this verse, it seems that teaching of the Torah is especially associated with the priestly community,16 life instruction with the community of wisemen, and revelation with the prophetic guild. Thus the verdict of the priests on the matter posed by Haggai’s questions would be regarded as authoritative.17

9 For a discussion of this possibility see S. Japhet, “The Temple in the Restoration Period: Reality and Ideology,” USQR 44 (1991): 227–28.
10 As E. M. Meyers points out, “Haggai presages a new role for the postexilic prophet, one that is drawn more and more closely to the priesthood” (“The Persian Period and the Judean Restoration: From Zerubbabel to Nehemiah,” in Ancient Israelite Religion: Essays in Honor of Frank Moore Cross [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1987], 513).
11 According to E. M. Meyers, Haggai’s expression שָׁאַל תּוֹרָה (“to ask a ruling”) was part of a new idiom that later developed into the common rabbinic expression פְסַק דִּין (“to render a verdict”), used for rabbinic legal decisions (“The Use of tôrâ in Haggai 2:11 and the Role of the Prophet in the Restoration Community,” in The Word of the Lord Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday, ASOR Special Volume Series (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 1:71, 74.
12 Cf. Matt 8:4; Mark 1:44; Luke 5:14.
13 J. E. Tollington’s comment is accurate: “Throughout the literature of the Old Testament Hag. 2.11–14 is the only instance where the process of priestly torah actually being sought and given is recounted” (Tradition and Innovation in Haggai and Zechariah 1–8, JSOTSup 150 [Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993], 81).
14 As G. Östborn says, “The prophets reveal tōrā while the priests cultivate and preserve it” (Tōrā in the Old Testament: A Semantic Study [Lund: Håkan Ohlssons Boktryckeri, 1945], 129). On the range of priestly instruction during the preexilic period see P. J. Budd, “Priestly Instruction in Pre-Exilic Israel,” VT 23 (1973): 1–14.
15 Cf. Mic 3:11a: “Her leaders judge for a bribe, her priests teach for a price, and her prophets tell fortunes for money.”
16 For a helpful summary of the development of the didactic role of the priest in the OT period see R. de Vaux, Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions, Biblical Resource Series (reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1997), 353–55.
17 Some scholars see this passage as reflecting a significant change in the development of OT prophecy. C. Meyers and E. M. Meyers, e.g., say, “No passage, however, is more indicative of the transformation of prophecy than this” (“Haggai, Book of,” ABD 3:22).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 172–173.

12-13절) 거룩과 부정에 대한 질문. 
먼저 사람이 옷자락에 거룩한 고기를 쌌는데 그 옷자락이 떡이나, 국, 포도주, 기름 혹은 다른 식물에 접촉할때 그것이 거룩하게 되겠느냐? 이에 대해 대제사장들은 그렇수 없다라고 답한다. 
어어서 시체를 만져 부정해진 자가 위의 음식들중 하나를 만지면 부정해 지겠느냐? 이에 대해서 부정하게 된다라고 답한다. 이 질문을 통해서 거룩이 무엇인지, 모세 율법은 거룩이 다른 이에게 전가될 수 있는지, 이 질문의 의도가 무엇인지를 생각해 보게 된다. 이에 대해서 아래와 같이 답한다. 거룩은 구별되어짐이다. 거룩함보다 부정함이 더 잘 전가된다. 그리고 지금 이 질문은 이 질문을 받는 대상들의 상태가 이와 같다는 사실을 우리에게 보여준다. 결국 이렇게 부정한 우리들이 거룩한 사역을 감당할 수 있는가이다. 
- The illustration that Haggai utilizes here is tightly constructed and free of digression or elaboration. Several key questions will guide our examination of this pericope. First, in this passage what exactly is meant by holiness? Second, does the Mosaic law allow for the possibility of transfer of holiness from one entity to another, and if so, in what way and under what conditions may this take place? Third, what application of this ruling does Haggai intend with regard to the circumstances described in this message? It is to these questions that we now turn our attention.
First, a grasp of the Old Testament concept of holiness is crucial to Haggai’s argument.21 To be holy means “to be set apart,” either intrinsically (e.g., in the sense that God is separate from limitation, weakness, impurity, or sin) or extrinsically (e.g., in the sense that people or objects may be consecrated for a sacred purpose). The verb qādaš, especially in the piel stem, is used with a variety of objects in the Old Testament. Holiness is a condition associated with inanimate things such as the Sabbath (e.g., Gen 2:3; Exod 20:8–11), a spatial area (e.g., Exod 19:23; 1 Kgs 8:64), parts of a sacrifice (e.g., Exod 29:27), ceremonial utensils (e.g., Exod 30:29; 40:9–11), or a period of time marked by fasting (e.g., Joel 1:14; 2:15). Even war can be sanctified in the sense that it is executed according to religious rules and for religious purposes (e.g., Jer 6:4; Joel 4:9). Holiness is a condition frequently associated with people, such as the Israelite priest (e.g., Exod 28:3, 41; 29:1, 33, 44), the Israelites themselves (e.g., Exod 19:10, 14; Josh 7:13), or a religious assembly (e.g., Joel 2:16). The primary notion of the word as used of people and things is the setting apart of someone or something for consecration to a sacred task or purpose.
Second, a grasp of the issue of transferability of holiness is crucial for understanding this section. Within the categories of the Hebrew Bible, is it possible for holiness or impurity to be conveyed from one entity to another? It is clear that Old Testament teaching does allow for such transfer under certain conditions. A holy person or object may cause what comes into direct contact with it also to be holy. This is the case with the priest and his sacred vestments (Exod 29:21) and with things that have come into contact with the sacred altar (Exod 29:37) or the sacred utensils (Exod 30:29) or the sacred offering (Lev 6:11[Eng. 18], 20[Eng. 27]).22 In these examples the level of contact is secondary, that is, a holy person or object conveys holiness to another person or object by virtue of direct contact with that person or object.
Haggai’s question, however, involves not a secondary but a tertiary level of contact. The consecrated meat, taken from slain sacrificial animals, is placed in the fold of a garment that subsequently comes into contact with another food item (such as bread, stew,23 wine, oil, or some other sort of food or drink).24 Now the question becomes, In such circumstances will the thing touched by the garment also be rendered holy? In v. 12 the priests answer this question in the negative: it will not be made holy simply by means of contact with the garment.25
Ritual guidelines for transfer of impurity differ somewhat from those for purity. In the case described above purity is incommunicable. But impurity in such a case is communicable, according to v. 13.26 If a person who is ceremonially defiled through contact with a dead body comes in contact with a garment containing sacred meat, there would be transfer of impurity.27 The result is that the holiness of the garment containing a sacred object is forfeited due to such contact. The answer to Haggai’s question, as reported by the priests in v. 13, is “Yes, it becomes defiled.”28 Transfer of impurity, in that sense, is easier than transfer of holiness.29
Third, the application that the prophet makes of this illustration is crucial.30 Obviously he is interested in something more than just a ruling concerning holy or defiled foods. The lesson of vv. 11–13 is intended to be illustrative of the spiritual condition of his audience.31 This point is made in v. 14: “ ‘So it is with this people and this nation in my sight,’ declares the Lord. ‘Whatever they do and whatever they offer there is defiled.’ ”
The rhetorical effect of this assertion probably shocked Haggai’s audience. After all, had they not responded to his earlier pleas to make the temple a priority? Had they not set aside their selfish pursuits in order to accomplish the task of restoration? Were they not at that very time involved in the project to which the prophet had called them? Should they not therefore be viewed as holy rather than as impure? Why had their prophet suddenly turned on them in this way? Haggai’s illustration thus introduces to the narrative an element of conflict. The question to be answered is this: How can an impure people engage in a holy task? Will not their contagious condition of impurity render impure everything with which they come in contact?32

21 Although the etymology of the root קדשׁ (“to be holy”) is not entirely clear, the semantic usage of the word in the Hb. Bible is relatively straightforward. See, e.g., HALOT, 1072–73.
22 See HALOT, 1072–75.
23 The precise meaning of the Hb. word נָזִיד in 2:12 is disputed. This word occurs only six times in the Hb. Bible. In Gen 25:29, 34 it is used of the cooked stew that Jacob gave Esau in exchange for his birthright. In 2 Kgs 4:38, 39, 40 it is used of a cooked stew that Elisha’s servant prepared for a group of prophets. Presumably in Hag 2:12 the word also refers to a cooked stew of some sort, probably consisting of vegetables boiled in water. This is consistent with the meaning of the verbal root of נָזִיד, which is זוּד (“to boil”). In 2:12 Kessler translates the word as “vegetables,” but this rendering fails to take into account the notion of cooked food as opposed to raw vegetables (The Book of Haggai, 197).
24 Haggai does not clarify whether the person carrying the meat in his garment is a priest or a layperson. The suggestion that “since a priest is not specified, the person carrying meat here must be a nonpriest” is an argument from silence (C. L. Meyers and E. M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB [New York: Doubleday, 1987], 55).
25 The negative לאֹ is used here with an emphatic nuance. Gesenius suggests the meaning “Certainly not!” or “No!” See GKC §152c.
26 In this pericope Haggai emphasizes the ritual terms קֹדֶשׁ (“holy”) and טָמֵא (“unclean”). The opposite of קֹדֶשׁ is usually חלֹ (“profane”), and the opposite of טָמֵא is usually טָהוֹר (“pure”). Kessler suggests that in terms of their relative force these words can be placed on the following continuum: קֹדֶשׁ—טָהוֹר—חלֹ—טָמֵא. He says, “Thus the two terms at the extreme ends of the continuum, קדשׁ and טמא, designate the most powerful forces and the only ones which are truly contagious, whereas the middle terms חל and טהור represent more neutral stages, which in themselves are not communicable” (The Book of Haggai, 203).
27 The Hb. expression is טְמֵא־נֶפֶשׁ (“unclean of soul”). In this expression נֶפֶשׁ apparently has the sense of “corpse,” an odd meaning for a word that normally is associated with life or vitality. Joüon-Muraoka take the genitive in a causal sense: “impure by (the fact of) a corpse” (GBH §129i). Here נֶפֶשׁ is apparently a shortened form of the expression נֶפֶשׁ מֵת (cf. Num 6:6; Lev 21:11). So K. Marti, Das Dodekapropheton, KHC 13 (Tübingen: Mohr [Siebeck], 1904), 388. Concerning impurity contracted through contact with a dead body see Num 5:2–3; 19:14–16, 21–22; Tob 2:9. On use of the biblical expression נֶפֶשׁ מֵת to refer to a corpse see M. Seligson, The Meaning of נפשׁ מת in the Old Testament, StudOr 16:2 (Helsinki: Societas orientalis fennica, 1951). For a helpful discussion of this word see G. André’s treatment in TDOT 5:330–42. See also DCH 5:731.
28 Biblical Hb. does not have a word for “yes” as such. One way affirmative answers are given to questions is by repetition of a key word in the question. In 2:13 when the priests respond to Haggai’s question about whether contact with a corpse conveys ceremonial impurity, they simply repeat the verb found in the question: “It is unclean.” See DG §153, rem. 1.
29 H. Wolf’s analogy is instructive: “One can catch a cold from someone else, but it is impossible to catch the health of another” (Haggai and Malachi [Chicago: Moody, 1976], 43). J. A. Motyer draws this analogy: “If you touch something with a dirty hand you will leave a dirty mark but if you touch something with a clean hand you will not leave a clean mark” (“Haggai,” in The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998], 3:995).
30 Amsler identifies the following three interpretations for v. 14: (1) the moral interpretation, which emphasizes the impurity of the people as what rendered both harvest and sacrifice unclean; (2) the cultic interpretation, which stresses the need for not just the altar but also the rebuilt temple in order for holiness to be communicated to the people; and (3) the anti-Samaritan interpretation, which is based on Rothstein’s arguments for dislocation with regard to 2:15–19 and which understands the unclean people referred to here to be the Samaritans rather than the Jews. It is the first of these views that seems best to fit the context. See S. Amsler, “Aggée, Zacharie 1–8,” in Aggée, Zacharie 1–8, Zacharie 9–14, Malachie, 2d ed., CAT 11 (Genève: Labor et Fides, 1988), 36–37.
31 Fishbane provides a helpful discussion of various techniques of what he calls inner biblical aggadic exegesis. One of these techniques is what he terms “lemmatic deduction or inference,” whereby a piece of accepted religious tradition is first cited and then applied to a broader issue. The questions posed, answered, and then applied in Hag 2:11–14 provide an example of this sort of lemmatic deduction. He discusses other examples as well (see Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, 419–25).
32 D. L. Smith has recently provided a sociological analysis of vv. 10–14, understanding this section to point to social conflict with a group of outsiders who have become a source of pollution for Haggai’s community (“The Politics of Ezra: Sociological Indicators of Postexilic Judaean Society,” in Community, Identity, and Ideology: Social Science Approaches to the Hebrew Bible, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study 6 [Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996], 548–56). But since no group of outsiders has been introduced, it seems better to understand the language of pollution in this pericope to refer to the Jewish community itself and not to an outside group.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 174–177.

14절) 이에 학개가 여호와의 말씀을 힘입어 이렇게 대답한다. 여호와 앞에서 이 백성이, 이 나라가 부정하고 그손의 모든 일도 그러하고 그들이 드리는 것들도 부정하다.
- The language Haggai uses in v. 14 to refer to the people is implicitly condemnatory. The expressions “this people” (hāʿām hazzeh; cf. 1:3) and “this nation” (haggôy hazzeh) are pejorative and carry an implied element of disassociation and rebuke. The first of these words (ʿam, “people”) is often used in the Hebrew Bible to refer to Israel; the second term (gôy, “nation”) is most often used to refer to non-Israelite nations, although it may on occasion refer to Israel.33 Likewise, the expression “this people” (hāʿām hazzeh) is often used of the Lord’s people, but it frequently carries negative connotations.34 The expression “this nation” (haggôy hazzeh) appears a total of only four times in the Hebrew Bible, all in reference to the Lord’s people.35 These phrases are synonymous references to the Judeans.36 But the terms lack any sense of warmth or cordial identification of the Lord with those who are so addressed. Due to their sinful condition the Lord was unable to address them as “my people,” although ultimately they were his people. Nor can he call them “my nation,” although in different circumstances this expression might have been used. Instead, the Lord’s words are more distant, signaling divine displeasure that is appropriate for a people insufficiently prepared for the work of God.37
33 For a helpful study on the use of גּוֹי to refer to Israel see A. Cody, “When Is the Chosen People Called a Gôy?” VT 14 (1964): 1–6. Cody identifies seven categories of usage for גּוֹי in this sense. Hag 2:4 falls in a category he calls words of divine rejection.
34 Among the prophets the expression הָעָם הַזֶּה (“this people”) is especially common in Isaiah and Jeremiah. See, e.g., Isa 6:10; 8:6, 11, 12; 9:15[Eng. 16]; 28:11, 14; 29:13, 14; Jer 6:19, 21; 7:16, 33; 8:5; 9:14[Eng. 15]; 11:14; 13:10; 14:11; 15:1; 16:5; 19:11; 21:8; 23:33; 27:16; 28:15; 29:32; 32:42; 33:24; 36:7.
35 Exod 33:13; Judg 2:20; 2 Kgs 6:18; Hag 2:14. Cf. the similar expression גּוֹי אֲשֶׁר כָּזֶה (“a nation that is like this”): Jer 5:9, 29; 9:8[Eng. 9].
36 I see no reason to suspect either of these phrases from a text-critical standpoint. S. Talmon has suggested that a doublet was created in 2:14 by the merging of two separate but synonymous readings (“Synonymous Readings in the Textual Traditions of the Old Testament,” Studies in the Bible 8 [Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1961], 343). But this is a conjectural proposal that lacks manuscript support to validate it. There are many places in the Hb. Bible where Talmon has made a good case for drawing a similar conclusion, but this does not seem to me to be one of them.
37 In 2:14 the LXX has a lengthy scribal gloss, part of which has been incorporated here from Amos 5:10: ἕνεκεν τῶν λημμάτων αὐτῶν τῶν ὀρθρινῶν, ὀδυνηθήσονται ἀπὸ προσώπου πόνων αὐτῶν: καὶ ἐμισεῖτε ἐν πύλαις ἐλέγχοντας (“[They shall be defiled] on account of their early material gains. They shall be pained because of their toils. And you hated those who reproved in the gates”). Such glosses are not uncommon in biblical manuscripts. It was relatively easy for scribes who were familiar with biblical content to incorporate readings from one text into another. Sometimes this appears to have been done intentionally, and other times it seems likely to have been accidental. For P. Haupt’s view that this gloss actually belongs to v. 16, having been mistakenly relocated to v. 14 through scribal error, see “The Septuagintal Addition to Haggai 2:14,” JBL 36 (1997): 148–50.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 177–178.

암 조직이 인간의 몸을 공격하는 것과 같이 죄의 부정함도 그러하다. 
- According to Haggai the people were in a deplorably sinful condition, and everything they came in contact with was thereby defiled due to their impurity. As a result, both their work on the temple and the religious sacrifices they periodically offered were unacceptable to the Lord. Like a cancer that has invaded a human body, bringing destruction and disintegration to the cells it comes in contact with, so these people were bringing spiritual defilement to everything they touched. Until the issue of their spiritual condition was resolved, no amount of religious activity they performed would be acceptable to the Lord.41 Haggai had uncovered and laid embarrassingly bare a need for repentance on the part of the people if their efforts at restoration were to enjoy the blessing and acceptance from God for which they hoped.42 The situation was desperate, but in the unit that follows the prophet moves the matter to a resolution.
41 P. R. Ackroyd’s words are worth weighing: “The people who are called to be the community of the new age can nevertheless frustrate that new age by their own condition. There is no automatic efficacy in the temple, no guarantee that by virtue of its existence it ensures salvation. The effectiveness of it and its worship is determined by the condition of those who worship, that is, whether or not they are in a fit condition to receive the blessings of God” (Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century b.c., OTL [Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968], 169).
42 E. Achtemeier’s application of Haggai’s warning is instructive: “The ultimate danger of temple building, and indeed of all works of religion, is the temptation to become self-righteous: to believe that association with the things of God automatically communicates moral purity, right judgment, unconquerable power—all those qualities associated with holiness, that is, with the total otherness of God. How many futile crusades have been launched on the basis of such bland assumptions! How many communities have been split by those claiming such rightness! How many smug presuppositions of such superiority have prevented the communication or the receipt of the gospel!” (Nahum—Malachi, IBC [Atlanta: John Knox, 1986], 102–3).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 179.

15절) 이제, 이는 앞선 내용의 반대를 의미하기도 하고 그러므로의 의미로도 사용된다. 본문에서는 현 순간의 긴박성을 나타낸다. 
학개 선지자는 백성들을 향해서 여호와의 전에 돌이 돌위에 놓이지 않았던 때를 추억하라고 말한다. 이 추억함이란 어떤 의미인가. 18절에도 동일하게 반복되는데 과거를 지향하는 것인지, 미래를 지향하는 것인지에 따라서 그 의미는 상당히 달라진다. 
- Haggai appeals to the people to identify the cause of their difficult circumstances and to adjust their lifestyle in light of recent events that have befallen them. If they are to learn from their history, they must “give careful thought to this from this day on” (vv. 15, 18). The Hebrew word rendered by the NIV as “on” (wāmāʿĕlâ) has been understood in different ways.48 Its basic sense is “above” or “upwards” (cf. ʿālâ, “to go up”), but it can have either a spatial sense (“upwards”) or a temporal sense (“onwards”). It is used in 2:15, 18 in a temporal sense. Whether it points forward to time yet in the future for Haggai’s audience or points backward to time already past is disputed. If it refers backward to difficulties previously encountered by the people as a consequence of their sin, the orientation is negative in nature. But if the word is forward-looking, it has a more positive nuance. It then anticipates the time of the Lord’s renewed blessing in fulfillment of the promise of v. 19: “From this day on I will bless you.”
48 D. J. Clark describes four different understandings of וָמָעְלָה in 2:15. First, מָעְלָה is elsewhere in the Hb. Bible usually used in reference to the future, and most modern versions understand the word to have a future orientation in 2:15. Second, some commentators take מָעְלָה in 2:15 to be pointing backward to prior events. Third, some scholars view מָעְלָה in 2:15 as a scribal mistake due to the occurrence of the word in v. 18. Fourth, some scholars give מָעְלָה a future sense but understand it to go back to the construction שִׂימוּ־נָא לְבַבְכֶם (“consider”). Clark adopts the fourth approach (“Problems in Haggai 2.15–19,” BT 34 [1983]: 432–33). See also A. Fernández, “El profeta Ageo 2, 15–18 y la fundación del segundo templo,” Bib 2 (1921): 206–15.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 181.

 consider (lit., “set your hearts”; cf. v. 18 [2x]). They are to keep an eye on past experience while looking forward to the new thing that God is presently doing. Before stone was placed. The play on this verb (Hb. sim, translated both “consider” and “placed”) supports a correlation between the current state of the people’s hearts and their common experience before construction restarted (vv. 16–17).
lit. literally
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1746.

16-17절) 20석의 곡식더미를 기대하지만 10석 뿐이고, 포도주 50그릇을 기대하지만 20그릇 뿐이다. 또한 여호와께서 백성들 손으로 지은 모든 것을 폭풍과 곰팡이와 우박으로 치셨으나 돌이키지 않았다. 부정한 이들의 현재 상태가 이러하다. 
-  I struck. A drastic action motivated by the love of a Father for his children, but to no avail (Deut. 8:1–5; 30:1–10; Heb. 12:7–11). blight … mildew. These examples of covenant curses (Deut. 28:22; 1 Kings 8:37; Amos 4:6–9) represent the spectrum of dangers (heat and moisture) faced by crops. to me (lit., “and there is not you to me”; cf. Amos 4:9). The people come “to” (Hb. ’el) their failed agricultural production (Hag. 2:16) but not “to me” (Hb. ’elay), i.e., they do not return to God.
lit. literally
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1746.

18절) 이러한 상태였지만 오늘부터, 바로 여호와의 성전 기초가 싸여지던 9월 24일 부터 추억하여 보아라. 새로운 시작을 명하시는 하나님. 

19절) 포도나무, 무화과나무, 석류나무, 감람나무의 종자가 창고에 있느냐? 과거에는 여기에 열매가 맺히지 않았지만 이제 오늘부터 여호와하나님께서 복을 주심으로 열매가 임할 것을 약속하신다. 






저작자표시

'성경묵상 > 학개' 카테고리의 다른 글

학 2:20-23 스룹바벨을 택하시는 여호와 하나님  (0) 2017.01.19
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 1:3-6 황무한 집에 거하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.11
728x90
The Coming Glory of the Temple
2 cIn the seventh month, on the twenty-first day of the month, the word of the Lord came by the hand of Haggai the prophet: 2 “Speak now to dZerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and to dJoshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, and to all the remnant of the people, and say, 3 e‘Who is left among you who saw this house fin its former glory? How do you see it now? gIs it not as nothing in your eyes? 4 Yet now hbe strong, O dZerubbabel, declares the Lord. hBe strong, O dJoshua, son of Jehozadak, the high priest. hBe strong, all you people of the land, declares the Lord. iWork, for jI am with you, declares the Lord of hosts, 5 kaccording to the covenant that I made with you when you came out of Egypt. lMy Spirit remains in your midst. mFear not. 6 For thus says the Lord of hosts: nYet once more, in a little while, oI will shake the heavens and the earth and the sea and the dry land. 7 And I will shake all nations, so that the treasures of all nations shall come in, and pI will fill this house with glory, says the Lord of hosts. 8 qThe silver is mine, and the gold is mine, declares the Lord of hosts. 9 rThe latter glory of this house shall be greater than the former, says the Lord of hosts. And sin this place I will give peace, declares the Lord of hosts.’ ”

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 2:1–9.

1절) 다리오왕 2년 7월 21일, 앞선 1장 15절과 비교할때 약 한달 정도가 지난 시점에 다시금 여호와의 말씀이 학개에게 임하였다. 
- Like Haggai’s first message, this sermon was given in the second year of King Darius, or 520 B.C. More specifically, it was delivered on October 17, 520 B.C. In the Jewish calendar the twenty-first day of the seventh month (i.e., Tishri) was the seventh day of the Feast of Sukkot, at which time work was customarily suspended in order to celebrate the time of the harvest (cf. Lev 23:33–36, 39–43; Num 29:12–40; Ezek 45:25). The timing of Haggai’s message was therefore opportune in that his audience had reason to be in Jerusalem and available for communal gatherings.
Since the presentation of Haggai’s first sermon on August 29, less than two months had passed. In that small amount of time, however, a significant change had occurred in the people’s outlook. Discouragement over the enormity of their task now threatened the success of the mission. The challenge confronting Haggai was to address these issues and instill in the people a vision of what the future held for the temple structure and for the nation.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 148.

2절) 앞서 나온대로 다시금 스알디엘의 아들 유다 총독 스룹바벨과 여호사닥의 아들 대제사장 여호수아와 남은바 모든 백성에게 학개 선지자가 하나님의 말씀을 고함

3절) 남아 있는자 중에 이전 성전의 영광을 본자가 누가 있는가? 실제로 66년전에 성전이 훼파되었기에 이당시 성전의 영광을 본 노인들도 소수 있을 것이다. 
- Who is left. “Left” translates Hebrew sha’ar, a wordplay on “remnant” (Hb. she’erit, v. 2, i.e., “what is left”). Among those who remained were some in their 70s or older who could remember Solomon’s temple that had been destroyed 66 years earlier (cf. Ezra 3:12). this house. The loss of temple and land is evidence for covenant curses for disobedience (1 Kings 9:6–9). Is it not as nothing in your eyes? The people could see that the rebuilt temple would be far inferior to Solomon’s temple in its wealth and physical beauty. The word glory is used in two senses in Haggai: here and in Hag. 1:8 it conveys the idea of “honor, distinction,” while in 2:7 it is probably “the glory of the Lord” (his special presence), which is said to “fill” the sanctuary (1 Kings 8:10–11; cf. Ex. 40:34–35).
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1745.
- Haggai pointedly asks, “It and nothing, are they not identical in your sight?”7 There was no comparison between the two buildings, and the people were loathe to pretend there was. The high hopes they had entertained at the beginning of their work had now turned to disappointment. The description calls to mind a scene that occurred at the laying of the foundation stone for the temple in 537 B.C., some seventeen years earlier. Ezra 3:12–13 provides this account:
But many of the older priests and Levites and family heads, who had seen the former temple, wept aloud when they saw the foundation of this temple being laid, while many others shouted for joy. No one could distinguish the sound of the shouts of joy from the sound of weeping because the people made so much noise. And the sound was heard far away.

7 On this construction see GBH §174i.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 151.

4절) 스룹바벨과 여호수아를 묘사하는 표현이 상이한데 이것은 큰 의미는 없다. 세번째 부류, 본문은 이 땅 모든 백성이라고 표현했는데 이는 앞서 남은 모든 백성과 같은 대상들이다. 이들을 향해서 다시금 내가 너희와 함께 하노라라고 약속하시는 여호와. 
-  In Hag 2:4 the expression is used in a rather general and neutral way as referring to all of Haggai’s otherwise unnamed audience, whether they were returnees from the exile or had remained in the land all along. “The people of the land” are thus the general population of the land, as distinct from the civil and religious leaders who are identified separately in v. 4. It is the same audience that earlier was referred to as “the remnant of the people” (1:12, 14; cf. 2:2).
The words “I am with you” renew the promise expressed earlier in 1:13. Their repetition here calls attention to a need for such reassurance on the part of Haggai’s audience and also underscores the certainty of the Lord’s presence with them. In 1 Chr 28:20 David encouraged his son Solomon with similar words:
Be strong and courageous, and do the work. Do not be afraid or discouraged, for the Lord God, my God, is with you. He will not fail you or forsake you until all the work for the service of the temple of the Lord is finished.
Just as the Lord’s presence with his people made possible the completion of Solomon’s temple, so it would be his presence that would make possible the completion of Haggai’s temple. Haggai’s audience could draw strength from the realization that they were not alone in their work. The Lord was indeed with them.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 153.

5절) 백성들에게 두려워하지 말 것의 근거로 애굽에서 나올때에 하나님과 친히 맺은 언약의 말과 나의 신이 너희 중에 머물러 있는 것을 이야기한다. 하나님께서는 식언하지 않는 분이시기에, 또한 임마누엘의 가장 강력한 표현으로 우리중에 머물러 있다라고 말씀하신다. 
- Haggai’s point is that just as the Lord covenanted to be with Israel as far back as the exodus event, and just as his presence had been evident throughout their prior history, so now the community should confidently face their difficulties in the enabling power of the Spirit and free from the paralysis of fear about the future. Haggai’s exhortation not to fear has its biblical roots in military language. Warriors were often admonished in this way prior to engaging in battle.29 Given the similarity in wording between the admonition in Hag 2:5 and the one in 1 Chr 28:20, Haggai may be drawing on the instructions David gave to his people prior to the building of the Solomonic temple.
29 For a discussion of this formula in OT literature see E. W. Conrad, Fear Not Warrior: A Study of ʾal tîrāʾ Pericopes in the Hebrew Scripture, BJS 75 (Chico, Calif.: Scholars Press, 1985).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 157.

6절) 하늘과 땅과 바다와 육지를 진동시키실 것이라고 말씀하시는 하나님, 이는 하나님의 전능하심의 표현이다. 
- Lord of hosts occurs five times in vv. 6–9, emphasizing the Lord’s sovereign authority over all things, including the adornment of his house (see note on 1:2). I will shake. The same verb form is translated “about to shake” in 2:21 (see note on Joel 2:10; cf. Heb. 12:26–27). In the present context, “shaking” does not primarily involve future judgment but God’s immediate intervention in providing for the work at hand (cf. Hag. 2:7–8).
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1745.
- The shaking of the heavens and earth is described in terms of imminence: “I am about to …”30 The adverb “once more” likens these events to the theophany and shaking of Mount Sinai that occurred in connection with the giving of the law (Exod 19:18).
30 The hiphil participle מַרְעִישׁ is best understood as futurum instans, pointing to the imminent future: “I am about to shake …” Cf. 2:21. This seems preferable to M. A. Sweeney’s view that the participle here describes the action as presently taking place. As Sweeney notes, in v. 7 the verbs are perfects with wāw consecutive, clearly referring to future time (“Haggai,” in The Twelve Prophets, Berit Olam: Studies in Hebrew Narrative and Poetry (Collegeville, Minn.: Liturgical Press, 2000), 2:548.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 158.

7절) 여호와께서 만국을 진동시킬 것이며 이를 통해 만국의 보배가 이르리니 영광으로 이 전에 충만케 하리라고 말씀하신다. 본문의 만국의 보배가 무엇인지에 대해서 여러가지 의견이 분분하다. 일반적으로 세가지로 나뉘는데 첫째는 메시야적 견해, non-메시야적 견해, 이 두가지의 종합으로 나뉜다. 
1) 메시야적 견해는 이 만국의 보배가 예수 그리스도이시다라고 말한다. 
- It was canonized, so to speak, in the fourth century by Jerome, whose rendering of this part of the verse in the Latin Vulgate has been very influential: et veniet desideratus cunctis gentibus, “and the desire of all nations shall come.” A similar understanding of the phrase, probably due either directly or indirectly to the influence of the Vulgate, is also found in a number of English versions.36 The following translations are clearly committed to a messianic understanding of the phrase:
KJV:“and the desire of all nations shall come”
NKJV:“and they shall come to the Desire of All Nations”
LB:“and the Desire of All Nations shall come to this Temple”
Douay-Rheims:“and the Desired of All Nations shall come”
The NIV (“and the desired of all nations will come”) is probably to be read with a messianic understanding as well.37
As a result of such translations the phrase “desired of all nations” has in many quarters assumed the status of a messianic title, as can be seen in Christian hymnody38 and in the titles of certain books that deal with Christian messianism.39 Those who favor a messianic understanding of this phrase usually relate it to the first advent of Jesus; it is especially common during the Christmas season to find Christological allusions to 2:7. There have been exceptions, however, to this understanding among Christians. Augustine understood the phrase to refer not to Christ’s first coming but to his second coming, since “before the whole world can await him and desire His coming, it must first believe in Him and love Him.”40 Like the view that links v. 7 to the first advent of Christ, association of this verse with the second advent of Christ has also been widely held in Christendom.

36 Cf. Luther’s 1532 German translation of 2:7: “Da sol denn komen aller Heiden Trost” (“then the consolation of all Gentiles shall come”). This translation clearly encouraged among German-speaking peoples a messianic understanding of 2:7. On the problems of this translation see esp. G. Krause, “ ‘Aller Heiden Trost’ Haggai 2, 7: Die Beweggründe für eine falsche Übersetzung und Auslegung des Textes durch Luther,” in Solange es »Heute« Heisst: Festgabe für Rudolf Hermann zum 70. Geburtstag (Berlin: Evangelische Verlagsanstalt, 1957), 170–78. Krause rightly describes Luther’s translation of the phrase as a lexically false translation (p. 170). The 1912 revision moved away from the messianic interpretation. It translates this part of v. 7: “Da soll dann kommen aller Heiden Bestes” (“then the best of all Gentiles shall come”).
37 In its introduction to Haggai the NIV Study Bible explains the phrase “the desired of all nations” as referring to the coming of the Messiah, although the note attached to Hag 2:7 in the same study Bible is ambivalent about this interpretation.
38 The familiar messianic interpretation of 2:7 is reflected in a number of well-known Christian hymns. Charles Wesley’s Come, Thou Long Expected Jesus has in stanza one: “Dear Desire of every nation, / Joy of every longing heart.” Henry Sloane Coffin’s stanza added to O Come, O Come, Emmanuel has “O come, Desire of nations, bind / All peoples in one heart and mind.” And James Montgomery’s Angels from the Realms of Glory has in stanza three: “Seek the great Desire of nations, / Ye have seen His natal star.”
39 A Christological understanding of this phrase is assumed in titles of several works dealing with various themes. See, e.g., R. C. Trench, The Fitness of Holy Scripture for Unfolding the Spiritual Life of Men. II. Christ the Desire of All Nations, Or the Unconscious Prophecies of Heathendom (Philadelphia: Hooker, 1850); E. W. Smith, The Desire of All Nations (Garden City: Doubleday, Doran & Co., 1928); M. von Blomberg, The Desire of the Nations: A Timely Word for a Distressed World (New York: Vantage, 1971); O. O’Donovan, The Desire of the Nations: Rediscovering the Roots of Political Theology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); El-Meskeen, “Desire of All Nations,” 83–89.
40 See Augustine, De civitate Dei, book 18, chap. 35; cf. chaps. 45, 48. For the English translation cited above see Saint Augustine: The City of God, Books XVII–XXII, in The Fathers of the Church: A New Translation (New York: Fathers of the Church, 1954), 138, 160, 168.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 160–161.

2) 비메시야적 견해로 이 만국의 보배가 물질적인 것으로 실제로 성전 재건을 위해 필요한 여러 물건들이라고 보는 견해이다. 이또한 다양한 견해가 있다. 
The context leads to the conclusion that by the phrase “desire of all nations” Haggai refers not to a messianic figure but to the Lord’s provision of financial resources for the temple by sovereignly inducing the nations to make their wealth available for this purpose. By “desire” Haggai refers to valuable treasures of monetary value that were prized by the nations, including such valuables as Nebuchadnezzar’s army had removed from the Solomonic temple in 586 B.C. and had taken to Babylon. To facilitate the completion of the temple the Lord will so move among these nations that they will bring resources to assist in the project. Since their wealth is in fact his wealth, as v. 8 points out, the Lord is free sovereignly to dispose of it as he chooses.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 162–163.
- The context leads to the conclusion that by the phrase “desire of all nations” Haggai refers not to a messianic figure but to the Lord’s provision of financial resources for the temple by sovereignly inducing the nations to make their wealth available for this purpose. By “desire” Haggai refers to valuable treasures of monetary value that were prized by the nations, including such valuables as Nebuchadnezzar’s army had removed from the Solomonic temple in 586 B.C. and had taken to Babylon. To facilitate the completion of the temple the Lord will so move among these nations that they will bring resources to assist in the project. Since their wealth is in fact his wealth, as v. 8 points out, the Lord is free sovereignly to dispose of it as he chooses.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 162–163.
- Consequently, the clause means “the desirable things of the nations will come.” It refers to the transfer of treasures to the Jerusalem temple.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 164.

3) 의도적으로 모호하게 표현하여 물질적인 보배로서의 의미와 메시야에 대한 대망을 함께 표현한 것으로 보는 견해도 있다. 
- Third, a few scholars have sought to find middle ground by combining the best of the alternative views. Wolf has argued that “desire” in 2:7 is deliberately ambiguous and that it allows for both a reference to material treasures and to personal desire.52 In his view the former understanding is supported by the reference to silver and gold in v. 8, whereas the latter interpretation is supported by the reference to the (shekinah) glory in v. 9, which as he points out requires the personal presence of God.53 According to Wolf, Haggai has carefully chosen his words in v. 7 so as to create an intentional ambiguity. In one sense the verse indicates that the wealth of nations will flow into the temple project, facilitating its rebuilding; in another sense “the desired of all nations” has a messianic dimension, pointing to the coming of Jesus.
52 H. Wolf, Haggai and Malachi (Chicago: Moody, 1976), 37.
53 G. R. Berry has discussed the significance of “glory” as indicating divine presence, particularly in connection with the Book of Ezekiel; “The Glory of Yahweh and the Temple,” JBL 56 (1937): 115–17. But Berry takes a far too pessimistic view of the historical accuracy of the biblical accounts, maintaining that postexilic Jewish literature was unrealistic both in its attitudes toward prior history and in its expectations for the future; see id., “The Unrealistic Attitude of Postexilic Judaism,” JBL 64 (1945): 309–17.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 164–165.

- The focus of Haggai’s oracle in its context is specifically on the immediate fulfillment of this prophecy. In addition, from a NT vantage point, many would see a foreshadowing of events unfolding in the incarnation of Christ and ultimately in his second coming at the end of the age (e.g., when Jesus spoke of his body as “this temple” in John 2:20–21; and when the book of Revelation speaks of the day when the whole city of Jerusalem will be filled with the presence of God, “for its temple is the Lord God the Almighty and the Lamb … and the kings of the earth will bring their glory into it,” Rev. 21:22, 24).
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1746.

9절) 이 전의 나중 영광이 이전 영광 보다 크리라고 말씀하심. 평강을 주시는 여호와 하나님. 본문에서 '나중’이 전에 붙는지 아니면 영광에 붙는지에 의견이 분분하다. 
- Third, a few scholars have sought to find middle ground by combining the best of the alternative views. Wolf has argued that “desire” in 2:7 is deliberately ambiguous and that it allows for both a reference to material treasures and to personal desire.52 In his view the former understanding is supported by the reference to silver and gold in v. 8, whereas the latter interpretation is supported by the reference to the (shekinah) glory in v. 9, which as he points out requires the personal presence of God.53 According to Wolf, Haggai has carefully chosen his words in v. 7 so as to create an intentional ambiguity. In one sense the verse indicates that the wealth of nations will flow into the temple project, facilitating its rebuilding; in another sense “the desired of all nations” has a messianic dimension, pointing to the coming of Jesus.
52 H. Wolf, Haggai and Malachi (Chicago: Moody, 1976), 37.
53 G. R. Berry has discussed the significance of “glory” as indicating divine presence, particularly in connection with the Book of Ezekiel; “The Glory of Yahweh and the Temple,” JBL 56 (1937): 115–17. But Berry takes a far too pessimistic view of the historical accuracy of the biblical accounts, maintaining that postexilic Jewish literature was unrealistic both in its attitudes toward prior history and in its expectations for the future; see id., “The Unrealistic Attitude of Postexilic Judaism,” JBL 64 (1945): 309–17.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 164–165.

하나님께서 평강을 주시기에 나중 영광이 더욱 큰 것이다. 
- Haggai’s second sermon concludes with a promise that “in this place I will grant peace” (ûbammāqôm hazzeh ʾettēn šālôm).70 The NIV translates the Hebrew conjunction as “and,” but it is probably best understood here in a causal sense: “because in this place I will give peace.”71 The statement in part is an explanation of the earlier part of the verse, showing why the latter glory of this temple will be greater than its former glory. The words may be an allusion to the Aaronic blessing found in Num 6:24–26, the final colon of which expresses a wish for the Lord’s peace to rest upon the recipient of the benediction. By “peace” is meant more than the mere absence of conflict and strife. The Hebrew word šālôm speaks of wellness and soundness in a holistic way. Whether “this place” in v. 9 refers specifically to the temple,72 as seems likely, or in a general way to the city of Jerusalem,73 as is possible, is not clear.74 The word māqôm is often used in the Old Testament in reference to a sacred site chosen by the Lord.75 But the word is also used as a synonym for Jerusalem (e.g., 2 Kgs 22:16; Jer 7:3; 19:3).76 In Hag 2:9 perhaps neither antecedent should be entirely excluded, since both city and sanctuary will be blessed objects in the fulfillment of the promise.
70 At the end of 2:9 the LXX has a scribal gloss that personalizes the preceding promise of the Lord to bestow peace on the temple site: καὶ εἰρήνην ψυχῆς εἰς περιποίησιν παντὶ τῷ κτίζοντι τοῦ ἀναστῆσαι τὸν ναὸν τοῦτον (“even peace of soul as a possession for everyone who builds in order to restore this temple”). The addition is apparently intended to specify more clearly who it is who will be the recipient of Yahweh’s promised blessing. According to this gloss it will be those who participate in the building project.
71 The wāw used by itself in this way expresses the causal relation in what Joüon calls “a light and elegant manner” (GBH §170c).
72 Cf. P. R. Ackroyd: “The indications are that maqom frequently has a technical meaning and this suggests that the primary reference in this passage too is to the Temple” (Exile and Restoration: A Study of Hebrew Thought of the Sixth Century b.c., OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1968), 156.
73 So Keil: “ ‘This place’ is not the temple, but Jerusalem, as the place where the temple is built” (Minor Prophets, 195).
74 J. L. Mackay thinks there is a play on words here, since Jerusalem can mean “city of peace” (Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi: God’s Restored People [Ross-shire, Scotland: Christian Focus Publications, 1994], 35). Cf. J. G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi: An Introduction and Commentary, TOTC (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1972), 49. The similarity between the word šālôm and the name of Solomon (šĕlōmōh), builder of the first temple, also may not be coincidental in this context. But Petersen discounts both of these possibilities (Haggai and Zechariah 1–8, 69–70).
75 E.g., Deut 12:5; 14:23, 25; 1 Kgs 8:29, 30; Ps 24:3; Ezra 9:8; Exod 29:31; Lev 6:9[Eng. 16], 19[Eng. 26]; Lev 14:13; Qoh 8:10.
76 See HALOT, 627.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 168.

- The latter glory of this house. The ultimate fulfillment of this passage demands a still wider view of redemptive history. The possessions of Jew and Gentile are enlisted in restoring the temple as a place of shalom (peace, well-being). Likewise, Ezekiel envisions the temple as a source of healing (Ezek. 47:1, 12; cf. Rev. 22:2). The NT “mystery” is a new spiritual temple composed of people from all nations (1 Cor. 3:9, 16–17), a new community that is the focal point of God’s saving work in the world (Eph. 3:8–10). Ultimately, the temple as a sign of God’s presence with his people is eclipsed by the presence of the Lord of hosts and the Lamb (Rev. 21:22–26).
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1746.





저작자표시

'성경묵상 > 학개' 카테고리의 다른 글

학 2:20-23 스룹바벨을 택하시는 여호와 하나님  (0) 2017.01.19
학 2:10-19 부정한 우리들에게 복을 약속하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.18
학 1:12-15 우리의 마음을 흥분시키시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.16
학 1:7-11 무엇을 위해서 달리는가?  (0) 2017.01.12
학 1:3-6 황무한 집에 거하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.11
728x90
The People Obey the Lord
12 tThen uZerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and uJoshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, with all vthe remnant of the people, obeyed the voice of the Lord their God, and the words of Haggai the prophet, as the Lord their God had sent him. And the people feared the Lord. 13 Then Haggai, the messenger of the Lord, spoke to the people with the Lord’s message, w“I am with you, declares the Lord.” 14 And xthe Lord stirred up the spirit of uZerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judah, and the spirit of yJoshua the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, and the spirit of all zthe remnant of the people. And they came and aworked on the house of the Lord of hosts, their God, 15 bon the twenty-fourth day of the month, in the sixth month, in the second year of Darius the king.

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 1:12–15.

12절) 앞서 1절에서 나온대로 다시금 스알디엘의 아들 스룹바벨과 여호사닥의 아들 대제사장 여호수아와 남은바 모든 백성이 여호와 하나님의 목소리와 학개 선지사의 말을 청종했다. 이들이 그 말씀에 청종한 이유는 바로 하나님께서 학개를 보내셨음을 인정했고 그 하나님을 두려워했기 때문이다. 
이 백성의 남은자들은 어떤 자들인가? 구약은 지속적으로 남은자 사상을 강조한다. 하나님을 떠나 우상을 섬기는 시대속에서 하나님을 따르는 이들을 남은자로 이야기했다. 학개 시대에는 포로 귀환을 한 무리들과 포로기 시대에 그 땅에 남아있던 무리들로 나뉜다. 본문에서 학개는 이 두 무리들을 구분하지 않고 좀더 넓은 신학적인 의미로 언약 공동체 속에 남아있는 자들을 의미하고 있다. 
본문에서 청종하다라는 단어는 ‘샤마’로 듣다, 순종하다라는 의미로 사용되고, 두려워하다라는 ‘야레’라는 단어가 사용된다. 진정으로 하나님을 하나님으로 인정하는 사람들은 그분을 두려워하고 경외하게 되고 그것의 결과는 그분의 말씀에 대한 순종으로 귀결된다. 
- The inclusion of the people along with Zerubbabel and Joshua in the response described in v. 12 is significant. Although v. 1 mentioned only the leaders as recipients of Haggai’s message, it is clear from the people’s response that the message was not directed to the leaders exclusively. The people were implicitly included as part of Haggai’s audience. They are called in v. 12 “the remnant of the people” (šĕʾērît hāʿām; cf. 1:14; 2:2). The concept of remnant is used in various ways in the prophetic literature of the Old Testament.5 It sometimes refers to a faithful segment of a larger group that included less committed Israelites (e.g., Amos 5:15; Isa 10:20–22; cf. 1 Kgs 19:18). Other times the word is more inclusive, serving as a general designation for all Israelites who had escaped a particular disaster (e.g., Jer 8:3; Ezek 5:10; 9:8; 11:13). Although the Jewish population of Haggai’s day consisted of two distinct groups, namely, those who had returned from the exile and those who had remained behind in the land during that same period, Haggai’s use of “remnant” probably is not limited to one or the other of these two groups.6 The prophet seems to use the term in a broad theological sense, referring to those who were truly part of the covenant community, whether they had returned from the exile or had been present in the land all along.7
It is significant that the word “remnant” does not occur in Haggai until v. 12, which describes the people’s obedient response to Haggai’s message. It is this obedience to the Lord’s message that qualifies them to be thought of as a remnant, a designation that invokes the remnant theology of earlier Old Testament prophets such as Isaiah and Jeremiah. The collocation “heard” (wayyišmaʿ; NIV “obeyed”) and “feared” (wayyirʾû) in v. 12 is a common one in the Hebrew Bible. It calls attention to the appropriate human reaction to a display of divine grace. The only proper response to hearing the word of the Lord that the prophets entertained was one of reverential awe and prompt obedience.8

5 See H. Wildberger, “שׁאר šʾr to remain,” TLOT 3, esp. pp. 1286–91.
6 H. Wolf understands the term to refer only to those who had returned from Babylon (Haggai and Malachi [Chicago: Moody, 1976]). I. G. Matthews, on the other hand, understands it to refer to those who had remained in Judah during the exile (“Haggai,” in Minor Prophets, An American Commentary [Philadelphia: The American Baptist Publication Society, 1935], 12:12). Both of these views seem to be overly restrictive in the way that they identify Haggai’s audience.
7 So, e.g., P. A. Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi, NICOT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 81.
8 Verhoef’s comment in my opinion is not likely to be correct: “This ‘fear’ is not a reverential attitude toward the Lord, which manifests itself in obedience to and trust in the God of the covenant … but it is an expression of their holy awe, their terror because of the wrath of the Lord” (Haggai and Malachi, 83).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 139–140.

13절) 여호와의 사자 학개가 여호와의 명을 의지하여 백성에게 고함, “나 여호와가 말하노니 내가 너희와 함께 하노라” 하나님이 우리와 함께 하시겠다라는 이 임마누엘의 선언은 그 어떤 약속보다 중요하고 강력한 약속이다. 이 임마누엘의 하나님에 대한 믿음은 우리로 하여금 온전한 헌신과 순종으로 이끈다. 
- Haggai may be anticipating these words and forming a subtle semantic link between them. The wordplay underscores the prophet’s role. He is the Lord’s messenger (malʾak) who is proclaiming the Lord’s message (malʾăkût) and is calling people to the Lord’s work (mĕlāʾkâ).19 These lexical choices form a literary thread that connects the several statements by the use of sound patterns.
19 I presume that something similar to this is what W. E. March means when he describes the latter word as recalling the former; see “The Book of Haggai: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” IB (Nashville: Abingdon, 1996), 7:720.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 142.
- I am with you (cf. 2:4). This is the great promise of covenantal assurance (cf. Num. 14:9; Josh. 14:12; Judg. 1:19; Isa. 43:5; cf. Matt. 28:20). The task before them will be undertaken with the promise of God’s aid. The promise to be with the people anticipates God being with his people in Christ (Matt. 1:23, “Immanuel”) and through the Spirit of Christ (Rom. 8:9–10; 1 Cor. 3:16).
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1745.
- In light of their favorable response to his message Haggai conveyed to the people the reassuring promise that the Lord’s presence would be with them in their endeavors.20 The encouragement Haggai offered the people would play a determinative role in their response. For that reason v. 13 plays an important role in the change of attitude displayed by the people. The comforting words “I am with you” (ʾănî ʾittekem) call to mind similar promises found elsewhere in biblical literature. Jacob received such a promise at Bethel as he began his journey to Haran (Gen 28:15). Joseph’s amazing success in Egypt was attributed to the fact that “the Lord was with him” in all he undertook (Gen 39:2, 21, 23). Moses heard similar words at the burning bush (Exod 3:12). So too did Joshua, Moses’ successor, as he assumed the mantel of leadership upon the death of Moses (Josh 1:5), as did Gideon when he faced the Midianites (Judg 6:16). So also did David when the Lord entered into a covenant with him (2 Sam 7:9) and Jeremiah when he began his prophetic ministry (Jer 1:8). When faced with the Assyrian threat, the Israelites took comfort in such words (Isa 8:10; cf. Ps 46:7, 11). And in the New Testament messianic expectations and hopes were fulfilled in one who was called “Emanuel, God with us” (Matt 1:23).
20 The Hb. text has אֲנּי אִתְּכֶם (“I am with you”) in v. 13 (cf. Jer 42:11; Hag 2:4). More often in the OT the promise of divine presence is expressed with the preposition עִם, but the difference is insignificant. H. W. Wolff suggests that “את may perhaps point rather to spatial nearness, עם rather to accompaniment and fellowship,” but this distinction should not be pressed (Haggai: A Commentary [Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1988], 50).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 142–143.

14절) 이제 여호와 하나님께서 주체가 되셔서 유다 총독 스룹바벨과 대제사장 여호수아의 마음과 남은바 모든 백성의 마음을 흥분시키심으로 그들이 하나님의 성전 역사를 시작했다. 잠자는 자들을 깨우시듯 당신의 백성을 깨우시는 하나님.
- The focus of the Lord’s ministry to them is centered on their spirits. “Spirit” (rûaḥ) in the Hebrew Bible can mean many different things (e.g., breath, breeze, wind, the human spirit, God’s spirit).22 Here the word is used of God’s arousing the human frame of mind to important activity, namely, the work on the temple. As Eichrodt points out, in the language of the Hebrew Bible, God may choose to awaken the spirit to decisive action, as here in Haggai, or he may choose to harden the spirit, leading to punitive action.23 It is to God’s stirring of the minds of the people that Haggai attributes the decision to move ahead with the work.
22 See, e.g., HALOT, 1197–1201.
23 See W. Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961), 2:133.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 143.

15절) 다리오왕 이년 6월 24일에 이 일이 일어났음을 밝힌다. 1절의 시간과 비교할때, 6월 1일, 23일 정도가 지난 시간이다. 학개 선지자의 첫 선포가 있은 지 3주 정도의 시간이 지났고 이에 백성들이 이 명령에 반응하기 시작한 것이다. 이 기간동안 성경이 침묵하고 있지만 백성들은 들은바 말씀을 가지고 정말 그러한가 고민하고 되뇌이는, 묵상하는 시간을 가졌을 것이다. 그리고 나서 때가 되자 하나님께서 그들의 마음을 흔들어 놓으셨고 그리고 그들은 하나님의 마음을 가지고 그 일을 시작하게 된 것이다. 
- The first part of v. 15 specifies the day on which the temple work began. It was “the twenty-fourth day of the sixth month.” The modern equivalent is September 21, 520 B.C. According to Hag 1:1 the prophet delivered this initial message on the first day of that same month, that is, August 29, 520 B.C. This means that just a little more than three weeks had elapsed between the delivery of that sermon and the actual beginning of the work on the temple. Assuming the people’s response to Haggai’s message was more or less immediate, these several weeks probably were spent in getting things ready for the work.24
24 D. J. Wiseman, on the other hand, views these twenty-three days as the length of time it took the people to respond to Haggai’s call (“Haggai,” in The New Bible Commentary, Revised [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970], 783).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 144.



저작자표시

'성경묵상 > 학개' 카테고리의 다른 글

학 2:10-19 부정한 우리들에게 복을 약속하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.18
학 2:1-9 장래 임할 성전의 영광  (0) 2017.01.17
학 1:7-11 무엇을 위해서 달리는가?  (0) 2017.01.12
학 1:3-6 황무한 집에 거하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.11
학 1:1-2 학개에게 임한 여호와의 말씀  (0) 2017.01.10
728x90
7 “Thus says the Lord of hosts: iConsider your ways. 8 Go up to the hills and bring wood and build the house, that mI may take pleasure in it and that nI may be glorified, says the Lord. 9 jYou looked for much, and behold, it came to little. And when you brought it home, oI blew it away. Why? declares the Lord of hosts. Because of my house hthat lies in ruins, while each of you busies himself with his own house. 10 Therefore pthe heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce. 11 And qI have called for a drought on the land and the hills, on rthe grain, the new wine, the oil, on what the ground brings forth, on man and beast, and son all their labors.”

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 1:7–11.

7절) 다시금 자신의 행위를 살필 것을 말씀하시는 하나님. 자신의 과거를 돌아보는 것은 이 과정을 통해서 이후 자신의 미래 행동의 변화를 이끌게 된다. 과거 자신의 실수나 잘못이 있는 것에 머물러서 포기할 것이 아니라 이것을 딛고 일어나서 실수로 부터 배우고, 자신의 삶의 방식을 바꾸어 나간다면 우리의 삶은 한걸음씩 나아질 것이다. 
- Once again the prophet calls attention to the fact that it is the Lord who is speaking through the prophetic message (cf. vv. 1, 2, 3, 5). And once again he urges the people to consider their ways (cf. v. 5). The implication is that proper reflection on their past course of action should lead to a change of behavior for the future.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 128.

8절) 여호와 하나님의 명령, 너희는 산에 올라가서 나무를 가져다가 성전을 건축하라. 그리하면 내가 그것으로 말미암아 기뻐하고 또 영광을 얻으리라. 우리가 올라가서 가져다가 건축하면 하나님께서 기뻐하고 영광을 받게 된다. 기뻐하다라는 단어 ‘rasa’는 사람이나 희생제물을 하나님께서 받으실때 사용하는 신학적인 단어이다. 여기서는 성전재건을 하나님께서 받으시는 것을 말한다. 또한 ‘kabed’는 영광을 나타내다라는 의미이다. 카베드는 무겁다라는 의미로 이것이 영광을 상징하는 의미로 사용된다. 
- As a result of their efforts, the Lord assures them, he will take pleasure in the rebuilt structure and will be glorified in it.104 The final two verbs in the citation of v. 8 are best understood as conveying purpose or result for the prior three imperative verbs pertaining to the work of rebuilding.105 The verb “take pleasure in” (rāṣâ) is part of the theological vocabulary of the Hebrew Bible; it is often used to signify the Lord’s acceptance of persons or sacrificial offerings.106 Haggai uses the word to refer to the Lord’s acceptance of the temple reconstruction. Although the verb kābēd, rendered here by the NIV as “be honored,” can have this sense,107 it probably is better to understand it here to mean “appear in one’s glory,” a sense well-attested elsewhere for this verb.108 The context suggests that the sense of the word is that the Lord will be pleased once again to manifest himself within the temple, or to appear in his glory, once the construction has been completed.109
104 The Hb. cohortative verb אֶכַּבְדָ is spelled defectively here, lacking the final letter hēʾ. The marginal qere restores the hēʾ missing in the kethib. Since the letter hēʾ can have the numerical value of five, some ancient rabbis fancifully interpreted the missing hēʾ in this word to indicate that in the Second Temple five things were missing. Yoma 21b of the Talmud offers the following explanation: “To indicate that in five things the first Sanctuary differed from the second: in the ark, the ark-cover, the Cherubim, the fire, the Shechinah, the Holy Spirit [of Prophecy], and the Urim-we-Thummim [the Oracle Plate].” (The first three items in the list are apparently regarded as a single unit, thereby yielding a total of five items.)
105 Since these two verbs are best understood as indirect volitives, the wāw should be rendered as “so that” (so NIV, NRSV; cf. ESV, NAB, NASB, NKJV) rather than as “and” (so KJV, ASV, NJB). On this construction see GKC §108d; GBH §169b.
106 See G. Gerleman’s discussion in TLOT 3:1259–61.
107 It is possible that the niphal of this verb is used here in a tolerative sense: “I will permit myself to be glorified.” On this use of the niphal see GKC §51c; IBHS §23.4f–g.
108 See HALOT, 455.
109 In 1:8 for the MT וְאֶכָּבְדָ (“I will be glorified”) Tg. Jonathan further explains with the promise ביקר לאשראה שכינתי ביה (“I will cause my Shekinah to dwell in it in honor”). Here “Shekinah” is used to express the Lord’s beneficent presence. For a helpful discussion of the Tg. reading see J. Ribera Florit, “La versión aramaica del profeta Ageo,” Anuario 4 (1978): 285.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 129–130.

9절) 많은 것을 바라지만 얻는 것이 적고, 그것을 집으로 가져갔으나 하나님께서 그것을 불어 버리셨다. 이는 하나님의 집은 황폐한데 자신들의 집만을 짓고 꾸미기 때문이다. 본문에서 불어버리다(napah)라는 히브리 성경에서 일반적으로 사용되는 동사는 아니다. 하지만 이 단어는 생명을 불어넣거나 또한 심판을 내리시는 상반되는 상황에서 사용되는 단어로 주위가 필요하다.  
- The word translated in the NIV as “blew away” (nāpaḥ) is not especially common in the Hebrew Bible. It occurs a total of a dozen times.116 Sometimes the word is used in a purely descriptive sense, as in the following instances. In Isa 54:16 it describes the blacksmith who fans coals until they produce a flame; in Ezek 22:20 it refers to the process of melting ore with intense heat; in Jer 1:13 and Job 41:12[Eng. 20] it describes a boiling pot. Other times the word is used in a life-giving sense. For example, in Gen 2:7 it refers to God’s action of breathing into man’s nostrils the breath of life; similarly, in Ezek 37:9 the prophet prays that God will breathe into the lifeless bodies of those slain, enabling them to live. The opposite of this is to breathe one’s last or to expire in death (so, e.g., Jer 15:9). Apparently this is also the sense of the word in Job 31:39: “If I have eaten its yield without payment and caused the death of its owners” (NRSV).117 Occasionally the word is used figuratively of God’s judgment. Ezekiel 22:21, for example, speaks of the Lord blowing on the wicked with his fiery wrath, and Jer 20:16 speaks of an unfanned fire that will consume the wicked. In Mal 1:13 the word describes an irreverent attitude on the part of the people toward the Lord’s altar: “And you sniff at it contemptuously.” Haggai 1:9 describes the Lord’s judgmental action of scattering the attempts of a disobedient people to gain for themselves economic prosperity: “What you brought home, I blew away,” the Lord asserts. The language is figurative;118 it vividly pictures the Lord’s disciplinary interference with the vain attempts of his people at personal gain while the work of God suffered decline due to their inattention. The opposite image in biblical literature is that of smelling with satisfaction and approval the pleasant aroma of sacrifice (cf., e.g., Gen 8:21).
As v. 9 makes abundantly clear, the damage inflicted by prior adverse climactic conditions and failed agricultural efforts was not coincidental, nor was it unrelated to the choices made by the people. Rather, these problems were due to the Lord’s intentional judgment upon his people because of their mistaken priorities. The logical connection between their religious choices and the difficulties that had befallen them is made apparent in Haggai’s argument by the yaʿan (“because”) clauses found in v. 9. There was a cause-and-effect relationship between the actions of the people and the crushing events that had transpired.

116 This verb appears mainly in the qal stem but twice each in the pual and hiphil. There is one other possible occurrence of the word, but it requires textual emendation. In Num 21:30 some scholars have suggested that in place of the name Nophah we should read a pual form of the verb נָפַח (i.e., עַד־נֻפַח אֵשׁ; cf. LXX, προσεξέκαυσαν πῦρ). BDB, e.g., tentatively suggests the translation “until fire was blown (hot) as far as Medeba.” But this seems to be an unnecessary suggestion, since the MT is acceptable here as it stands.
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
117 This rendering of Job 31:39 enjoys considerable support from modern scholars and probably is correct. The NIV understands the meaning of נָפַח in this verse differently, rendering “or broken the spirit of its tenants,” an understanding that finds some support in the ancient versions. HALOT, 709, suggests for this occurrence of the word the meaning “cause to groan or sigh.” DCH, 5:714 entertains the possibility that we may have here a homonym, נָפַח II, meaning “beat or afflict.”
118 The figure of speech is hypocatastasis.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 132–133.

‘여호와가 말하노라’라는 표현은 학개서에 지속적으로 반복되는 표현이다. 이는 선지자의 메시지가 불완전하고 연약한 인간으로부터 나온 것이 아니라 전능하신 하나님으로부터 나왔다는 사실을 강조하기 위한 것이다. 
- For the first time in v. 9 we encounter what is a frequent expression in Haggai. The formulaic statement “utterance of Yahweh of hosts” (nĕʾum YHWH ṣĕbāʾôt, NIV “declares the Lord Almighty”), or its shorter counterpart “utterance of Yahweh” (nĕʾum YHWH, NIV “declares the Lord”) occurs often in Haggai. For a book that is so brief, it is surprising that the former expression appears six times (1:9; 2:4, 8, 9, 23[2x]), and the latter expression appears six times as well (1:13; 2:4[2x], 14, 17, 23), for a total of twelve occurrences of this phrase in its two permutations. The reason for its repetition is fairly obvious: the writer of this book is anxious to underscore the divine origin of his message to the people. If the task to which the prophet is calling the fledgling nation is to be realized at all, it will only be due to a sincere response to a divine calling and not to fleeting enthusiasm generated by a mere human figure, no matter how charismatic that figure might be. The people must understand that Haggai’s message is in fact an “utterance of Yahweh.”
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 133–134.

자기 집을 짓기 위해 빨랐다. 본문의 원래 의미는 자기집을 향해 달렸다라는 의미이다. 이처럼 달리다라는 표현은 긍정적, 부정적으로 모두 사용된다. 하지만 본문의 사용은 부정적이다. 
- The final part of v. 9 once again sets the neglect of the temple in the context of selfish pursuits on the part of the people. The NIV’s “while each of you is busy with his own house” translates the clause wĕʾattem rāṣîm ʾîš lĕbêtô (lit. “and you run a man to [or for] his house”). “Running” as a figurative expression can have a positive nuance in the Hebrew Bible. Runners, for example, are dispatched to carry important messages (e.g., Esth 3:13, 15; 8:10), and runners serve as the escort or guards for a king or other important person (e.g., 1 Sam 22:17; 2 Sam 15:1; 1 Kgs 1:5; 14:27). The word also is used sometimes to describe the activity of those who engage in service for God (e.g., Ps 147:15). But sometimes the nuance of the word seems to be decidedly negative. In Jer 23:21, for example, the word is used to describe the activity of false prophets who “run with their message” even though the Lord has not sent them. So also in Hag 1:9 the Lord registers the complaint that the people are busy running after their own needs when they should instead be busy attending to the Lord’s desires. When it came to their own interests, they exerted a flurry of activity; but when it came to the Lord’s interests, they would not lift a finger. Furthermore, their selfish pursuits are pictured not as a single instance of failure but as a continual, ongoing habit or way of life.120 Surely the Lord would not tolerate such contradiction indefinitely.
120 The use of the participle רָצִים rather than a finite verb suggests a linear, progressive, or durative action as opposed to a single occurrence of the verbal action.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 134.

10-11절) 하늘은 이슬을 그쳤고 땅은 소산을 그쳤다. 또한 이 땅과 산과 곡물과 새포도주와 기름과 땅의 모든 소산과 사람과 가축과 손으로 수고하는 모든 일에 한재(가뭄)이 들게 하였다. 이는 하나님과의 언약을 상기시킨다. 순종하면 복을 받고, 불순종하면 저주를 받는 이 패러다임이 본문의 재앙에 꼭 들어맞는다. 
팔레스틴 지역에 있어서 이슬은 건기에 대지에 습기를 제공하는 매우 중요한 수단이다. 그런데 이 이슬이 그치는 것은 모든 땅의 소산이 크치고 생명체들의 삶을 어렵게 만드는 원인이 되는 것이다. 이처럼 이슬이 그치는 것은 가뭄이 임하는 이유가 된다. 
- The final two verses of Haggai’s first sermon trace the origins of the people’s difficulties to the Lord’s sovereign actions. The language of this section is reminiscent of the covenant curses found in Deuteronomy 28–30. There the Lord promised great blessings in return for obedience to the covenant obligations that he spelled out; but he also warned of the serious consequences that would overtake his people if they did not remain faithful to their covenantal obligations. Those curses included such things as the withholding of moisture from the planted crops (Deut 28:24); failed harvests (Deut 28:30, 38–42); and hunger, thirst, lack of clothing, and poverty (Deut 28:48). By invoking this language Haggai implied that the disasters being currently experienced were due to nothing less than the failure of the people to live up to their covenantal obligations. Because of their actions “the heavens have withheld their dew and the earth its crops,” according to v. 10.121 The implied contrast between people and nature is striking. The elements of nature modeled obedience to the divine will, while Haggai’s community modeled inattention to divine priorities.122
121 Although the NIV has the definite article before both “heavens” and “earth,” the MT lacks the article before “heavens” (שָׁמַיִם) but has it before “earth (הָאָרֶץ). The reason for the anomaly is unclear. Meyers and Meyers make the interesting suggestion that the absence of the article with “heavens” may partly serve to distinguish this entity (as the cause) from the other entities in the context (which are the affected objects). They also suggest that the final word in v. 11 lacks the article perhaps to emphasize its function as a summarizing item (“product of [your] hands”); see Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 31.
122 Baldwin calls attention to the paradox: “The heavens and the earth obeyed their Creator’s word but His people did not” (Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, 42).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 134–135.

- Haggai’s first message ends abruptly in v. 11 with no stated conclusion or direct call for action. But the implications are obvious. There could be no return to prosperity or normalization of relationship with the Lord until first there was a genuine repentance and a change of heart on the part of these people. They must acknowledge their prior sinful choices. They must accept the notion that their difficulties were a due recompense from the Lord for their failure to keep the stipulations of their covenant with him. And they must determine to correct their course of action immediately. Specifically, they must give to the task of rebuilding the temple in Jerusalem the priority that the Lord through his prophet Haggai attached to it.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 136.



저작자표시

'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 1:3-6 황무한 집에 거하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.11
학 1:1-2 학개에게 임한 여호와의 말씀  (0) 2017.01.10
학개(개요)  (0) 2017.01.09
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.

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.

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.
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.

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.

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. 



저작자표시

'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
728x90
The Command to Rebuild the Temple
1 aIn the second year of Darius the king, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came by the hand of Haggai the prophet to bZerubbabel the son of cShealtiel, governor of Judah, and to dJoshua the son of eJehozadak, the high priest: 2 “Thus says the Lord of hosts: These people say the time has not yet come to rebuild the house of the Lord.”

a ver. 15; ch. 2:10; Ezra 4:24; 5:1; Zech. 1:1, 7
b See 1 Chr. 3:19
c See 1 Chr. 3:17
d See Ezra 3:2
e 1 Chr. 6:15
 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton: Standard Bible Society, 2016), 학 1:1–2.


1절) 선지서의 첫 시작은 매우 중요한 정보를 우리에게 제공한다. 첫번째는 이 시기에 대한 정치, 역사적인 정보이고 두번째는 이 여호와의 말씀을 증거하는 사람이 누구인지, 세번째는 이 메시지를 일차적으로 받는 수신자가 누구인지, 공식적인 직함이 무엇인지를 제공한다. 
- First, there is a date that enables us to situate the message within the political history of the period. Second, the prophet is identified as the bearer of a message from the Lord. And third, the primary recipients of the message are identified by name, family descent, and official position.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 102.
1) 시기 : 다리오왕 2년 6월 초하루. 이는 기원전 520년 8월 29일로 추정된다. 
- The Darius of Hag 1:1 is Darius I Hystaspes, who ruled over Persia from 522 to 486 B.C. He ascended the throne of Persia after the death of Cambyses and was still relatively new to royal power when Haggai commenced the prophetic ministry described in this book. At that time Darius had been in power for only a couple of years, just long enough to have begun to settle in to what would be for him a lengthy rule over the mighty and far-flung Persian empire.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 103.

구약의 선지서들은 그들의 역사를 기술할때 이스라엘의 왕, 몇년이라고 기술한다. 하지만 이 시기는 남, 북왕국이 멸망하여 이스라엘에 왕이 없었던 시기이므로 역사적인 기술을 위해 이방의 왕을 기술할 수 밖에 없었다. 
- Old Testament prophets typically related their historical circumstances to a particular king of Israel or, in some cases, to multiple Israelite kings. The Book of Isaiah, for example, is situated in the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (Isa 1:1). The Book of Jeremiah links its events to the days of the Judean king Josiah and his son Jehoiakim (Jer 1:2–3). The Book of Ezekiel begins with a reference to the exile of Judah’s king Jehoiachin (Ezek 1:2). The Book of Daniel refers to the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah (Dan 1:1). Several of the Minor Prophets also have similar chronological notices at their beginning (e.g., Hos 1:1; Amos 1:1; Mic 1:1; Zeph 1:1).
Contrary to this convention, neither Haggai nor Zechariah relates their events to a king of Judah. The reason for this departure from the earlier norm is very simple. The Babylonian captivity had effectively brought an end to the Israelite monarchy. By the time of the events described in Haggai and Zechariah, the people of Israel had been without a king of their own for six decades and more. It was therefore necessary for these postexilic prophets to relate the events they describe to the only king Israel knew at that moment in history—a Persian king. This dating scheme implicitly calls attention to the fact that since Israel was without a king of her own, her national life must sadly be defined in terms of subservience to a foreign, and in fact a pagan, king. The degree to which the population of Judah was able to chart its own course for the future had significant restrictions imposed from the outside.

또한 분문의 구체적인 시기 또한 당시 사용하던 달력 시스템이 바뀌었다는 것을 이해할 필요가 있다. 포로기 이전에는 가을에 새로운 해가 시작했다면 포로기 이후에는 바벨론 달력 시스템을 차용해서 봄에 새로운 해가 시작된다. 그레서 이 유월(엘룰월)은 여름, 즉 기원전 520년 8월 29일에 해당한다. 
- This reference to month is complicated by the fact that at different times ancient Israel used different calendrical systems. Before the exile the Israelites had used a calendar marking the beginning of the new year in the fall. But during and after the exile Israel adopted the Babylonian calendar, with the new year beginning in the spring. It is this latter system that is reflected in Haggai’s usage. The sixth month (i.e., Elul) was therefore toward the end of summer.10 In terms of modern reckoning the date in v. 1 corresponds to August 29, 520 B.C.11
10 See the discussion in J. Finegan, Handbook of Biblical Chronology: Principles of Time Reckoning in the Ancient World and Problems of Chronology in the Bible (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1964), §§65–81.
11 As pointed out earlier in the introduction, for the conversion of ancient dates to their modern equivalents I am indebted to R. A. Parker and W. H. Dubberstein, Babylonian Chronology, 626 b.c.–a.d. 75, Brown University Studies 19 (Providence: Brown University Press, 1956).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 105.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 104–105.

유대인들에게 매달 첫째날은 하나님께 특별한 제물을 드리는 날이다. 민 10:10에 초하루에는 번제물과 화목제물을 드릴 것을 명했다. 그러나 이시기에 도리어 여호와의 전은 폐허가 되어 있기에 하나님께 예물을 드리고 예배를 드리는 행위는 그쳤다. 
- That the first day of the month was the occasion of Haggai’s message is of interest in that according to Torah the first of every month was a time for special offerings to the Lord (cf. Num 28:11–15). As such it was to be a time of celebration and rejoicing (Num 10:10). But with the temple lying in ruins, there was no way properly to observe these festive occasions as had been done less than a century before. It may be that by delivering his message on this first day of the month Haggai intended the very timing of his message to call attention to the spiritual dilemma that confronted his people.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 105.

학개의 특징은 또한 매우 구체적인 날자를 기록하고 있다는 것이다. 이는 먼저 사건의 사실성을 강조하는 것이고 또한 선지자의 메시지의 신뢰성을 보장해주는 역할을 한다. 

- The specificity with which these dates are given in Haggai serves two purposes. First, it underscores the factuality of the events that are described, situating them within a verifiable historical context. Second, it lends credibility to the predictive portions of the prophet’s message, since his accuracy on past allusions can be readily established.15
15 See further P. A. Verhoef, “Notes on the Dates in the Book of Haggai,” in Text and Context: Old Testament and Semitic Studies for F. C. Fensham (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1988), 263–64.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 106.

2) 메시지의 기원이 여호와께로 말미암았음을 알려준다. 사람을 통해서 여호와의 말씀이 전달되지만 이것이 사람으로부터 기인한 것이 아님을, 하나님께롤 부터 온 것임을 강조한다. 또한 1절은 이 신적 말씀이 선지자를 통해서 하나님의 백성에게 전달되고 있음을 강조한다. 본문에 학개로 말미암아라는 단어는 by the hand of Haggai인데 through의 의미가 크다. 일반적으로 선지자들이 말씀을 받는다고 할때 본문처럼 말씀을 전달하는 통로로서 강조할 것인지, 아니면 말씀을 받는 자로서 강조할 것인지에 따라 표현이 달라진다. 이것의 의미는 단지 이 말씀을 거부한다는 것이 사람의 말을 거부하는 것이 아니라 하나님을 거부한 것이 된다는 것이다. 
- This statement calls attention to two equally important features of Haggai’s message.16 First, it underscores the divine origin of his message, claiming for it revelatory status. Though conveyed by a human spokesman, the message did not originate with that messenger. It is a message whose importance derived from its suprahuman and divine nature. It is “the word of the Lord” (dĕbar YHWH). Thus from the start of this book the prophet stresses the notion that through his message it is ultimately the Lord who speaks. This is a theme to which Haggai will repeatedly return in the remainder of this book. The prophetic word as divine revelation is an essential part of the theology of this book; it is a component of Haggai’s thought that is emphasized over and over.17 Second, the expression in v. 1 links this divine word to the human messenger who delivered it to the Lord’s people. It is a message that came “through” (bĕyad, lit. “by the hand of”) Haggai.18 The more familiar expression for describing prophetic reception of a divine message speaks of the word of the Lord coming “to” (ʾel) the prophet rather than “through” (bĕyad) him.19 This expression appears in Hag 2:10, 20, for example. There is a slight distinction of meaning in the two phrases. The expression hāyâ bĕyad (“it was by the hand of”) directs attention to the transmission of the message to the audience for whom it was intended, while hāyâ ʾel (“it was to”) focuses on the prophet’s reception of the divine oracle. In the former instance the emphasis is on the prophet’s role as intermediate agent through whom the divine message was communicated to a third party, whereas in the latter instance the emphasis is on the prophet’s role as chosen recipient of the divine message.20 In v. 1 it is the former construction that appears.
16 In 1:1 the LXX includes the words λέγων Εἰπόν (“saying, Say”), thus treating the following portion of v. 1 as part of the direct discourse rather than, as in the MT, a narrative identification of the intended recipients of the divine word that was mediated by Haggai. This addition in the Gk. text probably is due to harmonization with Hag 2:1–2, where we find in the MT the words לֵאמֹר אֱמָר־נָא (“saying, Say”). The reading of the MT is preferable here.
17 See further on this point the discussion of Haggai’s theology found in the Introduction.
18 Cf. Hag 1:3; 2:1; Mal 1:1. The phrase is also employed frequently throughout the OT in expressions other than those that describe reception of divine revelation. R. L. Smith’s comment is therefore not accurate as it stands: “This construction ‘by the hand of …’ is rare in the prophets. It is found only in Hag 1:1, 3; 2:1; and Mal 1:1” (“Haggai,” in Micah–Malachi, WBC [Waco: Word, 1984], 152). On the contrary, the expression appears often in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel; it occurs occasionally in certain other prophetic writings as well.
19 See, e.g., Hos 1:1; Joel 1:1; Jonah 1:1; Mic 1:1; Zeph 1:1; Zech 1:1.
20 This distinction, however, should not be rigidly pressed. Hag 2:1 has בְּיַד where we might have expected אֶל instead. Kessler attributes the exception to the work of a redactor who was inconsistent with the practice followed elsewhere in Haggai. M. McEntire insists on a distinction between the expressions here and understands the author to be signaling disruption in the narrative. But whether the variation is a reflection of intentional narrative strategy, as McEntire suggests, or whether the distinction between the expressions has simply blurred is not easy to say. The latter seems more likely (see McEntire, “Haggai—Bringing God into the Picture,” RevExp 97 [2000]: 70, 72; Kessler, The Book of Haggai, 117.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 107.

3) 메시지의 수신자는 스알디엘의 아들 유다총독 스룹바벨과 여호사닥의 아들 대제사장 여호수아이다. 스룹바벨은 정치 권력을 대표하고, 여호수아는 종교권력을 대표한다. 여호와의 전을 건축하기 위해서 위 사람들에게 반드시 여호와의 말씀이 전달되어야 했다. 
- The first is Zerubbabel, who represented political power as the Persian-appointed governor over Judah, and the second is Joshua, who represented religious authority as the duly appointed high priest. Five times these two names appear together in Haggai (1:1, 12, 14; 2:2, 4), always in the same order. This suggests a diarchic form of rule in which civil and religious leadership were merged in the governing body. The consistent listing of Zerubbabel first hints at his primacy in this arrangement.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 108.
스룹바벨(바벨론의 씨)은 스알디엘(내가 여호와께 물었다)의 아들로 이름의 의미를 볼때 포로기에 잡혀 간 상황에서 출생했을 것이다. 
- It is Zerubbabel who is first singled out. Not all of the biblical details concerning the family relationships of Zerubbabel are equally clear. The probable meaning of his name (i.e., “seed of Babylon”)22 suggests that he was born in the captivity. The name may also hint at the extent to which the Jewish community of the exile had accepted its Babylonian environment.23 Zerubbabel is described here as the “son of Shealtiel.”24 Unlike the name Zerubbabel, Shealtiel reflects a northwest Semitic environment. In Hebrew the name means “I have asked God.” It is presumably an allusion to parental prayer for the birth of a child. The name may be an indication that Zerubbabel’s father had been born before the exile, since during the exile west Semitic influences in names probably gave way to Babylonian influences.25
Shealtiel was an older son of the Judean king Jehoiachin, according to 1 Chr 3:17. The Chronicler presents Zerubbabel’s genealogy in terms slightly different from those found in Haggai. According to 1 Chr 3:19, Zerubbabel’s father was not Shealtiel but Pedaiah, who was a younger son of Jehoiachin (1 Chr 3:17). This would seem to imply that Shealtiel was actually Zerubbabel’s uncle, not his father. How is this discrepancy to be accounted for? We can only conjecture. Suggestions that the problem is due to textual error in the MT are not convincing.26 It may be that in keeping with the law of Levirite marriage (Deut 25:5–6) Pedaiah had married Shealtiel’s widow, in which case a male child born to that relationship could properly be called the son of the presumably deceased Shealtiel. This proposal would seem to be an adequate explanation for the problem,27 although it must be stressed that it goes beyond the silence of the biblical passages in the matter.
Another problem concerns the relationship of Zerubbabel to Sheshbazzar, who is mentioned in the Book of Ezra as among the Jews who returned from Babylon to Judah and who was appointed governor by Cyrus (Ezra 1:8, 11; 5:14, 16).28 The details of the biblical material in this regard are difficult to sort out. The traditional view, which is at least as old as Josephus,29 is that Zerubbabel and Shesbazzar are different names for the same individual. The view held by most modern scholars, however, is that they are two different individuals.30 In that case Sheshbazzar was responsible for starting the work on the foundations of the temple, while Zerubbabel at a later time was responsible for bringing the work to completion (cf. Ezra 3:8–10; 5:16).

22 See BDB, 279; HALOT, 279. The name Zerubbabel is probably a Hb. adaptation of the Akk. zēr bābili.
23 So, e.g., J. A. Soggin, Introduction to the Old Testament, from Its Origins to the Closing of the Alexandrian Canon, rev. ed., OTL (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1980), 325.
24 Cf. Hag 1:12, 14; 2:2, 23; Ezra 3:2, 8; Neh 12:1; Matt 1:12; Luke 3:27.
25 So C. L. Meyers and E. M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AB (New York: Doubleday, 1987), 10.
MT Masoretic Text
26 The LXX of 1 Chr 3:19 has Shealtiel rather than Pedaiah as the father of Zerubbabel. But this is the easier reading text-critically and is likely due to scribal harmonization.
27 For a fuller discussion of this view see C. F. Keil, Minor Prophets, Commentary on the Old Testament, vol. 10 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 175–76. It is an interpretation that has been adopted by a number of modern commentators, although Meyers and Meyers regard it as an unconvincing attempt at harmonization (see Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 10).
28 A further complication is Sheshbazzar’s relationship to Shenazzar of 1 Chr 3:18. Is this one individual referred to by two different names, or are these two separate individuals? Most probably, they are separate individuals. See, e.g., S. Japhet, “Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel—Against the Background of the Historical and Religious Tendencies of Ezra-Nehemiah,” ZAW 94 (1982): 95–96; L. L. Grabbe, Judaism from Cyrus to Hadrian (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1992), 76. But some scholars equate the two. See, e.g., E. Stern, “The Persian Empire and the Political and Social History of Palestine in the Persian Period,” in Introduction: The Persian Period, CHJ (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 70; J. Bright, A History of Israel, 3d ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981), 362.
29 See Josephus, Ant. 11.13.
30 For a summary of the issues see J. Lust, “The Identification of Zerubbabel with Sheshbassar,” ETL 63 (1987): 90–95; J. S. Wright, The Building of the Second Temple (London: Tyndale, n.d.), esp. pp. 10–12; Japhet, “Sheshbezzar and Zerubbabel,” 90–94. Lust concludes that Zerubbabel is to be identified with Sheshbazzar, while Wright maintains that Sheshbazzar (to be equated with Shenazzar of 1 Chr 3:18) was the uncle of Zerubbabel. Japhet sees the two as separate individuals. T. André also discusses the issue at some length, concluding that Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar should be viewed as separate individuals (Le prophète Aggée: Introduction critique et commentaire [Paris: Librairie Fischbacher, 1895], 48–63).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 108–110.


2절) 여호와의 전은 성전으로서의 그리스도, 성전으로서의 교회 그리고 새 예루살렘에 거하시는 하나님으로 그분의 존재를 형상화 하고 이를 기대한다. 
- The house of the Lord symbolizes his presence and looks forward to Christ as temple (John 1:14; 2:19–21), the church as temple (1 Cor. 3:16; Eph. 2:20–22), and the dwelling of God in the new Jerusalem (Rev. 21:3; 21:22–22:5).
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1744.

The Lord of Hosts: Frequency and Use in the OT
Why does the title “Lord of hosts” appear more frequently in Malachi than in any other OT book, and in the time of prophetic books more than during other time periods? In the period of Isaiah, the northern kingdom was overrun and destroyed and the southern kingdom almost destroyed by the “hosts” (armies) of Assyria. God’s people had so few troops that the Assyrian King Sennacherib could mockingly challenge King Hezekiah with the offer of a gift of 2,000 horses if Hezekiah could find enough soldiers to ride them (Isa. 36:8). Similarly, in the period of Jeremiah, the southern kingdom was wiped out by the hosts (armies) of Babylon.
In the postexilic period of Malachi, the postage-stamp-sized Judah, as a tiny province within the vast Persian Empire, had no army of its own. It is precisely in such times, when God’s people are painfully aware of how limited their own resources are, that there is no greater comfort than the fact that the Lord has his invincible heavenly armies standing at the ready. It is like the comfort that Elisha prayed for his servant at Dothan when they were surrounded by the Syrian armies: “ ‘O Lord, please open his eyes that he may see.’ So the Lord opened the eyes of the young man, and he saw, and behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire all around Elisha” (2 Kings 6:17). Perhaps it is like the comfort felt by Jesus before the cross: “Do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father, and he will at once send me more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matt. 26:53).
The following chart shows the percentages of verses in a book containing at least one occurrence of the phrase, “Lord of hosts” (or related variation):
1. Malachi (43.6%)
2. Haggai (31.6%)
3. Zechariah (21.8%)
4. Amos (6.1%)
5. Jeremiah (5.9%)
6. Isaiah (4.7%)
7. Nahum (4.3%)
8. Zephaniah (3.8%)
9. Habakkuk (1.8%)
10. Micah (1.0%)
11. 2 Samuel (0.9%)
12. Psalms (0.7%)
13. 1 Samuel (0.6%)
14. Hosea (0.5%)
15. 1 Kings (0.4%)
16. 1 Chronicles (0.3%)
17. 2 Kings (0.3%)
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1776.

본문에서 이스라엘 백성을 내 백성이 아니라 이 백성이라고 지칭한다. 이것은 지금 하나님과 이스라엘 백성들 사이의 거리감을 나타낸다. 
- Following the introduction to the Lord’s words in v. 2, we expect to find his initial instructions through Haggai to the people. Instead, v. 2 abruptly continues with a citation of what the people were saying in defense of their actions.49 The Lord’s remarks begin with the expression “these people” (hāʿām hazzeh).50 There is a notion of contempt and disparagement in the words. The Lord does not refer to them as “my people,” although in light of earlier covenantal promises extended to their ancestors he might have done so. Instead he calls them “this people.” The personal pronoun “my,” which might have brought a measure of reassurance to the people in the midst of their hardships, is replaced by the cold and detached demonstrative pronoun “this” (cf. Isa 6:9, 10). The word signals at the outset of this message that something was wrong in the relationship between the Lord and the inhabitants of Judah.
49 More than a century ago this problem was noticed by A. P. Sym, who concluded that a dislocation of part of Haggai’s message had occurred (“A Textual Study in Zechariah and Haggai,” ExpTim 7 [1895–1896]: 257–60, 317–21). According to Sym most of Zech 4:6–10 actually belongs after Hag 1:2, since it fits here better than it does in Zechariah. The reasons advanced for this view, however, are not compelling, and there is no external evidence that supports such a conclusion. That there is an awkwardness to this pericope in Haggai is clear; that the solution to the problem lies in shifting Zech 4:6–10 to a position following Hag 1:2 seems unlikely.
50 The Hb. expression is singular, “this people,” but English translators often prefer to render this collective singular as a plural, “these people” (so NIV, ESV, NRSV, Tanak, NET Bible).
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 115.
백성들의 변명은 자신들이 성전 건축에 관심이 없거나 그것을 안하겠다는 것이 아니라 그 때가 이르지 아니했다라는 것이다. 적합한 때가 아니기에 성전을 재건하지 않는 것이라고 핑계대고 있는 것이다. 

- In this section Haggai repeatedly pictures the temple as a house (bêt) in which the Lord resides. The choice of terms is significant. In biblical language the description of the temple as God’s house suggests a roofed building equipped with furniture suitable to its function as a dwelling place for the deity. The temple perceived as a house differs in Old Testament thought from an altar, which could stand in the open by itself and which functioned not as a dwelling for the deity but as a place of sacrifice.53 This notion of the temple as the house of God is thus important for understanding the urgency Haggai attaches to this structure. To leave the Lord’s dwelling in a state of disrepair was to show disrespect to its occupant.
53 On this distinction see further M. Haran, “Temples and Cultic Open Areas as Reflected in the Bible,” in Temples and High Places in Biblical Times: Proceedings of the Colloquium in Honor of the Centennial of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, Jerusalem, 14–16 March 1977 (Jerusalem: Nelson Glueck School of Biblical Archaeology of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion, 1981), 31–37.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 116.


저작자표시

'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 1:3-6 황무한 집에 거하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.11
학개(개요)  (0) 2017.01.09
728x90
Author and Title
The book of Haggai contains messages delivered by the prophet Haggai, and thus it is reasonable to consider Haggai its author. The name Haggai, which means “festal,” promotes the conjecture that his birth occurred during a festival of Israel, or perhaps links his name with his message, anticipating the restoration of Israel’s great feasts within a restored temple. Nothing is known of his genealogy.

Date
The word of the Lord comes to Haggai between late August and mid-December of 520 b.c. There is widespread scholarly consensus on these dates, though this does not preclude the possibility of editorial activity. If such editing did take place, it likely occurred before 515 b.c., when the temple was completed. The dates given are significant for their places in both the liturgical and agricultural calendars of Judah (see notes on 1:1; 1:15b–2:1; 2:10).




Theme
The restoration of the Lord’s house by the people of God will mediate God’s presence.

Purpose, Occasion, and Background
Haggai motivates the leaders (Zerubbabel and Joshua) and the people of God to consider their current economic and spiritual circumstances and to renew their efforts to complete the work of temple restoration.
The historical setting of the book is in the sixth century b.c. among the returned exiles from the Babylonian captivity. The Persian ruler Cyrus the Great (559–530 b.c.) captured Babylon in 539. His edict in 538 b.c. permitted the return of Jews to Jerusalem so that they might rebuild the temple (Ezra 1–2). Initial work stalled, however, when opposition arose (Ezra 3:1–4:5).
The events within the book of Haggai take place during the reign of Darius I (522–486 b.c.), a general who rose to power following the death of Cyrus’s son Cambyses (530–522). The specific mention of the “second year of Darius” (Hag. 1:1) places the book firmly in the year 520 b.c. Darius’s support was vital for the completion of the temple (Ezra 5–6).

Key Themes
1. The restoration of God’s house. Temple restoration highlights the Lord’s desire to renew a covenant relationship with his people, characterized by his presence (1:13; 2:4–5). A decaying temple signifies a decaying relationship and brings defilement rather than holiness to the people (2:14).
2. The prophetic word is the divine Word. The divine message comes “by the hand of Haggai” (1:1, 3; 2:1, 10), is characterized by “thus says the Lord” (1:2, 5, 7; 2:6, 11), is a message “to Haggai” (2:20), is characterized by “declares the Lord” (1:9, 13; 2:4 [3x], 8, 9, 14, 17, 23 [3x]), is the “voice of the Lord their God” (1:12), and is the “Lord’s message” (1:13).
3. The Lord is sovereign. The phrase “Lord of hosts” occurs 14 times in these 38 verses (see 1:2). The Lord gives the divine word, controls the fortunes of his people (1:9; 2:17, 19) and nations (2:6–8), directs nature (1:10), motivates his people to action (1:14; 2:4), and establishes and deposes kingdoms (2:20–23).
4. The people must work. A restored house will bring pleasure and glory to the Lord (1:8) and convey blessing to the people (2:19), but there is work to be done. Physical labor (1:14) is urged in the form of numerous imperatives (1:7–8; 2:4–5). But there is also “heart” work to be done, as evidenced by the call to consider past experience in light of the present inaction (1:5–7; 2:15–19).
5. The restoration of David’s house. Undoubtedly Zerubbabel, the heir of David (see note on 1:1), is promised an elevated status (2:23). The Lord, who had taken off the “ring” of the Davidic house (Jer. 22:24–27), now promises to wear it once again. As in the OT (2 Samuel 7; Ps. 2:6), the NT understanding inextricably unites king and temple. It is only as the temple is rebuilt (Matt. 26:61; 27:40; John 2:18–22) that Christ Jesus, the Davidic heir, is installed as the messianic King (Rom. 1:1–4), thus fulfilling the promises to Zerubbabel (Matt. 1:1, 12–13; Luke 3:27).

  p 1742  Jerusalem at the Time of Haggai
c. 520 b.c.
Haggai prophesied to the people of Jerusalem after they had returned from Babylon in 538 b.c. and before they had rebuilt the temple in 515. The city of Jerusalem lay in ruins, the walls and the temple having been destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 b.c. Within a year after returning from Babylon, the people had laid the foundation for the new temple, but by Haggai’s time they had still not completed it. Haggai, together with Zechariah, called upon the people to stop focusing on their own economic well-being and complete the temple.



History of Salvation Summary
After the exile, the Lord is renewing his promises to his people and calls on them to finish rebuilding the temple so that he might be with them and fulfill his promises to bless the whole world through them (2:9), particularly through the Messiah from the house of David (2:23). (For an explanation of the “History of Salvation,” see the Overview of the Bible. See also History of Salvation in the Old Testament: Preparing the Way for Christ.)

Literary Features
Although the book of Haggai falls within the general category of prophecy, it is not a typical prophetic book. It is written in prose instead of the customary poetry. Although there are predictions of promised   p 1743  blessing, there are no oracles of judgment in the usual sense. Instead, God simply calls the nation’s attention to its low ebb, as though judgment had already occurred. There are also intermittent golden-age visions, as well as a narrative episode (1:12–15). By means of a specific instance (the rebuilding of the temple), the book of Haggai is a relevant and timeless book on the need to put God’s work first in one’s life. For the prophet’s society, rebuilding the temple would be the visible sign of the people’s determination to put God first.

Outline
I. Introduction: Reluctant Rebuilders (1:1–2)
A. Characters (1:1)
B. Context (1:2)
II. Consider Your Ways: Fruitless Prosperity (1:3–12)
A. Work without satisfaction (1:3–11)
B. General response: obedience and fear (1:12)
III. Promise and Progress (1:13–15a)
A. God’s promise (1:13)
B. Specific response: work begins (1:14–15a)
IV. The Former and Latter Glory of This House (1:15b–2:9)
A. Comparing past and present (1:15b–2:3)
B. Acting based on the past (2:4–5)
C. An image of God’s house restored (2:6–9)
V. Consider Your Ways: Holiness and Defilement; Repentance and Blessing (2:10–19)
A. Analogy: holiness and defilement (2:10–14)
B. Consider life before restoration began: you did not turn (2:15–17)
C. Consider life since restoration began: I will bless (2:18–19)
VI. Zerubbabel: The Signet Ring (2:20–23)
A. Destruction upon kingdoms (2:20–22)
B. An image of David’s house restored (2:23)

c. about, approximately
 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1741–1743.



학개의 현대와의 연관성
Haggai’s ministry was one of calling his generation to a renewed commitment to the task of the immediate restoration of Jerusalem’s temple and normalization of the religious life of Israel. In large measure this task that lay before them was a test of whether they would put God first in their lives. It was a test whose momentous significance the prophet drove home in a relentless and uncompromising fashion. The people would have to decide whose interests mattered most to them—their own or the Lord’s.
 Richard A. Taylor and E. Ray Clendenen, Haggai, Malachi, vol. 21A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2004), 25.

학개는 포로기 이후의 성전 재건의 기사를 기록하고 있다. 짧은 책이지만 하나님의 백성들로 하여금 자신들이 처한 상황을 재고하고 이를 통해서 성전 재건을 위해서 노력할 것을 촉구한다. 
주요 주제로는 하나님의 성전의 재건, 선지자의 예언적 말씀이 신적 말씀임을 밝히고, 하나님의 전능하심을 나타내고, 백성들이 수고해야함을 말해주고 나아가 다윗의 집의 재건이라는 주제를 강조한다. 



저작자표시

'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 1:3-6 황무한 집에 거하시는 하나님  (0) 2017.01.11
학 1:1-2 학개에게 임한 여호와의 말씀  (0) 2017.01.10

+ Recent posts

티스토리툴바