17내가 사람들에게 고난을 내려 맹인 같이 행하게 하리니 이는 그들이 나 여호와께 범죄하였음이라 또 그들의 피는 쏟아져서 티끌 같이 되며 그들의 살은 분토 같이 될지라
18그들의 은과 금이 여호와의 분노의 날에 능히 그들을 건지지 못할 것이며 이 온 땅이 여호와의 질투의 불에 삼켜지리니 이는 여호와가 이 땅 모든 주민을 멸절하되 놀랍게 멸절할 것임이라
The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 습 1:14–18.
본문 14-18절의 5절에서 날(욤)이라는 표현이 총 10번이나 등장한다. 그중에 14절에서는 여호와의 큰 날, 여호와의 날로 18절에서는 여호와의 분노의 날이라고 표현한다. 이스라엘에게 있어서 전통적으로 여호와의 날은 이스라엘의 적을 무찔러 주시는 날이었다.
출애굽기 14:20
20애굽 진과 이스라엘 진 사이에 이르러 서니 저쪽에는 구름과 흑암이 있고 이쪽에는 밤이 밝으므로 밤새도록 저쪽이 이쪽에 가까이 못하였더라
사사기 5:4–5
4여호와여 주께서 세일에서부터 나오시고 에돔 들에서부터 진행하실 때에 땅이 진동하고 하늘이 물을 내리고 구름도 물을 내렸나이다
5산들이 여호와 앞에서 진동하니 저 시내 산도 이스라엘의 하나님 여호와 앞에서 진동하였도다
사무엘상 7:10
10사무엘이 번제를 드릴 때에 블레셋 사람이 이스라엘과 싸우려고 가까이 오매 그 날에 여호와께서 블레셋 사람에게 큰 우레를 발하여 그들을 어지럽게 하시니 그들이 이스라엘 앞에 패한지라
하지만 이제는 여호와 하나님께서 자신을 대적한 백성들을 상대로 싸우시고 있는 것이다. 이제 여호와의 날은 크고 두려운 날이 되었다. 스바냐 선지자가 전하는 여호와의 날은 두려운 날, 분노의 날이 되었다.
특히 오늘 스바냐가 묘사하는 여호와의 날은 전쟁의 언어들로 가득차 있다. 매우 신속하게 임하는 심판의 소리들이다.
14절) 가깝고 빠르다. 용사의 슬픈 절규
15절) 분노의 날, 환난과 고통, 황폐와 패망, 캄캄하고 어두운 날, 구름과 흑암의 날
16절) 나팔, 경고, 견고한 성읍과 높은 망대가 무너짐
17절) 고난이 임함, 소경처럼 걷게 됨, 피가 쏟아져 티끌같이 됨, 살은 오물처럼 됨
18절) 분노, 질투의 불, 모두가 멸절됨
14절) 여호와의 큰 날이 가깝고도 빠르다. 여호와의 날에 용사가 거기서 심히 큰 소리로 슬피 울 것이다.
본문에 용사는 ‘깁보르’로 ‘강력한, 힘이 센, 용감한’ 용사를 말한다. 그런데 이 용사가 여호와의 날이 두려워 싸울 엄두도 내지 못하고 슬피 울고 있는 것이다. 본문은 여호와의 날의 특성으로 가깝고 빠르다는 것을 또한 매우 무서운 날임을 소리로 들려주고 있다.
- Zephaniah’s message must have had contemporary relevance. He probably intended his message to call sinners to repentance that God might stay his strange work (2:1–3) and to encourage the righteous concerning God’s future work of grace.163The message had continuing meaning as Jesus came preaching the kingdom of God at hand (Mark 1:15). It continues speaking to God’s people as we wait for the day of our Lord Jesus Christ and the final eschatological events.164
163For the phrase “the strange work of God” see Isa 28:21.
164D. A. Garrett states, “The day of the Lord is notexclusivelyany specific period of tribulation, deliverance, or final judgment. But each of these events can rightly be called the day of the Lord” (Hosea, Joel, NAC [Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1997], 306).
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 438.
아모스 8:10
10너희 절기를 애통으로, 너희 모든 노래를 애곡으로 변하게 하며 모든 사람에게 굵은 베로 허리를 동이게 하며 모든 머리를 대머리가 되게 하며 독자의 죽음으로 말미암아 애통하듯 하게 하며 결국은 곤고한 날과 같게 하리라
- The sound of the day of the Lord is a sound of agony, defeat, and hopelessness. The word for “warrior,”gibbôr, is the word used of Samson and is part of the compound form of the “mighty God” in Isa 9:6. It is an intensive form, thus indicating a particularly strong person who can surpass others in carrying out great deeds.167The warrior’s cries of fear and distress would show how great the anguish of that day, when not even the strongest could stand against the onslaught.168
167H. Kosmala, “גָּבַרgābhar,” etc.,TDOT2:373.
168Berlin,Zephaniah, 89. Motyer (“Zephaniah,” 3:923) presents an alternative understanding: the warrior is God offended by sin and the person with whom sinners have to deal. Motyer sees human reactions beginning only in v. 17. Likewise Achtemeier (Nahum–Malachi, 71–72) sees the entire verse as announcing the war cry of the Divine Warrior encouraging his troops to start the battle (cf. Isa 42:13).
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 439.
15-16절) 본문은 여호와의 날을 매우 극적으로 묘사한다.
그 날(여호와의 날)은 분노의 날이다.
환난과 고통의 날이다.
황폐와 패망의 날이다.
캄캄하고 어두운 날이다.
구름과 흑암의 날이다.
견고한 성읍과 높은 망대를 대항하여 나팔과 전투의 함성을 발하는 날이다.
이는 전쟁의 소리들로 여호와께서 임하심으로 모든 성읍과 망대를 치심으로 임하는 공포와 패망을 매우 생생하게 묘사하고 있다.
15절의 흑암은 창 1:2의 상태를 연상시킨다. 하나님께서 진노하심으로 이 세상의 질서, 해와 달과 별들을 물리치시면 그 날을 짙은 흑암으로 가득차게 될 것이다.
- 1:16The trumpet180and the battle cry symbolized warfare. When these sounds reverberated through the city, the people knew to prepare for the battle (Judg 3:27). Jerusalem typified a fortified walled city reinforced by corner towers. If the enemy attacked such strong defenses, the people must have sensed that the remainder of the area had fallen, leaving the city without aid or reinforcements or hope. Zephaniah implied the imminent overthrow of the city. The enemy would not be slowed by walled cities and corner towers.
The certainty of the destruction came because of the character of the enemy. Whereas the immediate enemy turned out to be the mighty Babylonian army under the direction of Nebuchadrezzar, in reality it was the Lord himself fighting against the city. With God leading the charge, the city faced certain doom.
Herein lies the Hebrew concept of holy war. God led the fight against his enemies. In normal cases the concept of holy war gave tremendous comfort: “For the Lord your God is the one who goes with you to fight for you against your enemies to give you victory” (Deut 20:4). In this instance the whole idea is filled with bitter irony, for God would lead the charge against his own people.181
180Motyer (ibid.) notes that “in Exod 19:16 the trumpet was a summons of grace to enter the divine presence. Typically Zephaniah reverses the symbolism. It is now the mustering of the Lord’s host to battle (Jer 4:19; Amos 2:2).”
181L. E. Toombs, “Ideas of War,”IDB4:796–801.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 441.
17-18절) 모든 이들에게 임하는 여호와의 분노
사람들에게 고난을 내려서 소경과 같이 걷게 할것인데 이는 그들이 여호와께 범죄하였기 때문이다. 그들의 피는 먼지같이, 그들의 살은 똥과 같이 부어질 것이다. 그들의 은과 금도 여호와의 분노의 날에 그들을 구원하지 못할 것이
다. 여호와의 질투의 불로 온 땅이 불타버릴 것인데 땅에 사는 모든 사람을 완전히 갑자기 없애버리실 것이다.
그 날에 모든이들은 소경과 같이 아무것도 보지 못하고 암중모색하게 될 것이며 생명의 근원인 피와 살은 티끌과 배설물과 같이 된다는 것이다. 전쟁이 일어나서 사람들이 도망갈때 귀중품만을 챙긴다. 그 금과 은으로 양식을 바꿀 수 있기 때문이다. 하지만 여호와의 분노의 날에는 그러한 귀금속도 우리를 구원할 수 없다. 여호와의 질투의 불이 너무 뜨거워서 모든 것을 불태워버릴 때 금과 은도 견디지 못할 것이다.
17절은 분명하게 이러한 심판, 질투의 불로 모든 것이 삼켜지게 되는 이유를 분명하게 이야기한다. 이는 ‘그들이 나 여호와께 범죄하였음이라’라고 말한다. 창세기는 인간의 죄 때문에 온 세상이 심판을 받은 것을 분명하게 밝힌다.(창 3-9장) 인간의 죄는 불순종이다. 하나님을 주인으로 삼아 청지기로 살아갈 것을 명령하셨는데 이를 거부하고 인간 자신이 주인된 삶을 살기로 선택하였던 것이다. 바로 이러한 자기중심성이 인간을, 온 세상을 심판으로 이끈 것이다.
- 1:17Why would God do such a thing? How could God lead the charge against his own people and destroy the city in which he caused his name to dwell (Deut 12:5)? Like Jeremiah and the writer of the Kings material, Zephaniah solved the theological conundrum by reminding the people of their sin (1:4–6). They had sinned against the Lord.
The poetic text contains five lines, with the first two lines and the last two lines paired. The middle line stands prominently alone in the middle, giving the reason for destruction (literally): “Because against the Lord they have sinned.”
Sin is first and foremost against God. David asserted the truth of this statement when he confessed his sin against God: “Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight” (Ps 51:4). David had sinned against Bathsheba, Uriah, and the entire nation, but more than anyone else, he had sinned against God. “Humans may categorize their sins into the serious, the mediocre, and the insignificant. To Zephaniah (see Jas 2:10–11) the mere fact of sin excited and merited the whole weight of divine rage.”182True sorrow for sin comes after repentance (Jer 31:19). Only after repentance can we see what our sin has done to God.
182Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:924.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 441–442.
무엇이 여호와의 질투의 불, 진노의 날을 견딜 수 있는가? 사람들은 당시 견고한 성읍이나 높은 망대와 같은 군사력 혹은 금과 은과 같은 경제력이 자신들을 지킬 수 있을 것이라고 생각했다. 하지만 여호와의 분노를 버틸 수 있는 것은 아무것도 없다. 여호와의 날이 임하면 큰 용사라도 두려워 떨며 울부짖을 것이고 견고한 성읍과 망대는 무어져 내릴 것이다. 여호와께 범죄한 모두는 티끌과 배설물 같이 될 것이며 그 질투의 불앞에 소멸될 것이다.
그 날이 가까움을 볼 때 우리가 할 수 있는 것은 무엇일까? 하나님앞에 나아가 회개하며 그분의 은혜와 자비를 구하는 것 뿐이다.
12그 때에 내가 예루살렘에서 찌꺼기 같이 가라앉아서 마음속에 스스로 이르기를 여호와께서는 복도 내리지 아니하시며 화도 내리지 아니하시리라 하는 자를 등불로 두루 찾아 벌하리니
13그들의 재물이 노략되며 그들의 집이 황폐할 것이라 그들이 집을 건축하나 거기에 살지 못하며 포도원을 가꾸나 그 포도주를 마시지 못하리라
1)장사하는
The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 습 1:7–13.
앞서 종교적으로 부패한 유다를 비난했다면 이제 정의와 공의가 무너진 사회를 비판하고 있다. 정부는 썩었고(8절), 지도층은 외세에 적극 호응하고 있으며(8절) 폭력과 사기가 난무하고(9절), 자신의 풍요로움에 도취한 부자들은 하나님을 두려워하지 않는다.(12-13절) 유다의 상류층을 겨냥한 비난이다. 요시야 시대에 이르기까지 유다는 70여년간 경제적 부흥을 이루었지만 사회는 도리어 착취와 타락으로 나락에 빠졌다.
7절) 여호와의 날이 가까왔으므로 주 여호와 앞에서 잠잠하라. 여호와께서 희생 제물을 준비하고 그가 철할 자들을 구별하셨음이다.
본문의 여호와의 날은 심판을 당하는 자에게는 재앙의 날이지만 구원을 받는 자들에게는 소망의 날이 된다. 이 날은 선택받은 선민들 뿐만 아니라 이방인들에게도 영향을 끼친다. 이 날은 신적인 전쟁과 관련이 있다. 하나님께서 오셔서 대적자들을 치심으로 승리를 선포하는 날이 될 것이다. 이 심판의 자리에서 경외와 두려움으로 잠잠할 것이다. 여호와 하나님께서 친히 그 날을 선포하시고 잠잠할 것을 명하시고 희생 제물을 준비하신다. 그리고 그가 청할 자들을 구별하시는데 이들은 일차적으로는 희생 제물을 먹도록 초청받은 이들일 것이고 이차적으로는 자신들이 죄로인해서 희생 제물이 될 자들을 의미할 수 있다.
본문의 희생은 희생 제물을 의미하는 히브리어 ‘제바흐’로 ‘속죄의 행위로 짐승을 잡아 죽이는 행위’를 의미하며 화목제를 의미한다. 이는 신과 제물을 드리는 이 사이의 화목의 관계를 만들기 위해서 드리는 것이다. 이 과정에서 제물은 죽어야 하고 이 제물을 함께 나누는 과정속에서 화목과 회복, 교제가 있게 되는 것이다. 그런 의미에서 볼때 이 화목의 제사에 동참하여 이 제물을 먹는 이들과 이 과정에서 희생 제물이 되는 대상은 여호와의 날 어떤 이는 구원을, 어떤 이는 심판을 받는 것을 연상시킨다.
- 2.The normal use of this term in Ugar. (cf. also Phoen., Punic, Aram., and Heb.) is the same as in the HB, where it refers to a “sacrifice of slaughtered sheep, goat or cattle to create communion between the god to whom the sacrifice is made and the partners of the sacrifice, and communion between the partners themselves” (HALOT262b). For example, early in the Ugar. Keret Epic the god El instructed distressed Keret: “Lift up your hands (to) heaven (and) sacrifice (vb.dbḥ) to the bull El your father, make Baal to come down with your sacrifice (nom.bdbḥk), the son of Dagon with your game” (CML, 84, lines 75–79a). Both the nom. and the vb. are also well attested in all sorts of religious ritual texts and contexts at Ugarit (Tarragon, 56; cf. also Pope, Miller, etc.), and the fact that in Ugar. as well as in Heb. the vb. and nom.dbḥ, sacrifice, has as derived nom.mdbḥ(t), altar, argues for its sacral focus in both languages (Milgrom, “Profane Slaughter,” 1).
Ugar. Ugaratic
Phoen. Phoenician
HB Hebrew Bible
HALOTThe Hebrew and Aramaic Lexicon of the Old Testament, 1994–(ET ofHALAT)
Ugar. Ugaratic
CMLCanaanite Myths and Legends, ed. G. R. Driver, Edinburgh, 1956; ed. J. C. L. Gibson, 19782
Ugar. Ugaratic
Willem VanGemeren, ed.,New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1997), 1067.
- The “day of the Lord”95reflected popular thought that went back for centuries among the people of Israel. VanHorn concluded that the day of the Lord was a product of covenant theology.96“The Day of the Lord is that time when for His glory and in accordance with His purposes God intervenes in human affairs in judgment against sin or for the deliverance of his own.”97From a study of the concept of the day of the Lord, von Rad drew two conclusions: (1) that the day of the Lord embodied a pure event of war, the rising of the Lord against his enemies; and (2) that the concept is of old-Israelite origin, not from foreign sources.98
Judging by Amos’s discussions concerning the day of the Lord, the people of his day must have seen the day as one of God’s judgment against their enemies and a time of lightness and joy. Amos countered their optimism with a sober assessment of the day of the Lord. He said that it would be a day of “darkness, not light” (Amos 5:18). Amos compared the day with that of a man who fled from a lion only to run into a bear or retreated to the safety of his home only to be bitten by a snake (Amos 5:19). “Even though they expected their righteousness to be vindicated against their enemies, they were to discover that God’s righteousness entailed his move against them.”99
Isaiah understood the day of the Lord similarly as a day of God’s judgment against the proud and the haughty among the people of Jacob (Isa 2:6–22). Isaiah’s definition emphasized the central point—it is God’s day: “The Lord Almighty has a day in store …” (Isa 2:12). “The transferal of the concept from judgment prophecy to salvation prophecy and vice versa is facilitated by the essentially ambivalent nature of the day of Yahweh; it brings judgment upon the enemies of Yahweh and salvation for his people. The deciding factor depends upon the side to which Israel or the addressees belong. The concept of the day of Yahweh thus constitutes an essential point of contact between the prophetic proclamation of judgment and of salvation and demonstrates their inner unity.”100
The day is not only a future day.101It can also refer to great events of the past. The fall of Jerusalem in 587 b.c. in fulfillment of prophecy was a “day of the Lord” (Lam 2:21). Isaiah saw the overthrow of Babylon as the day of the Lord (Isa 13:13, 19). “Neither in prospect nor in retrospect was the day of the Lord fully realized. The prophets simply had in mind that these were events of such a dire nature that they exemplified a reality that would be fully demonstrated when the day finally came. But it is this ultimate day that preoccupies Zephaniah. His thinking is insistently universal (1:17a, 18b; 2:11; 3:6, 8b, 9, 20). He seems uninterested in identifying specific historical events.… Zephaniah, whether under historical or theological prompting, has left us a tract on the day of the Lord—the climax alike of history, sin, and the purposes of God.”102
Two centuries after Amos and Isaiah, Zephaniah saw the day of the Lord as a day when God would judge his people. “Zephaniah’s own understanding of the Day of the Lord unfolds through a series of vivid images.”103In these verses (7–13) he speaks of sacrifice, false worship, lamentation, personal search, and the looting of the wealthy. He thus gives new depth of meaning and unforgettable imagery to the depiction of God’s day of judgment.
God’s day could also be a day of salvation: return to paradise (Isa 35:1–10); new fertility (Joel 3:18); great harvest (Joel 2:24); God’s removal of the enemy (Joel 2:20); restoration of Judah’s fortunes (Zeph 2:7); the pouring of God’s Spirit on the earth (Joel 2:29); the experience of God’s loving presence (Zeph 3:17). Then all who call on the Lord’s name will experience salvation and deliverance (Joel 2:32). These will include the Gentiles (Ps 96; Zeph 2:11; 3:9–10). Even creation itself will experience renewal (Joel 2:22, 24).
The New Testament took up this language and referred to the “day of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:8). His glory and salvation will be fully revealed. Pentecost was a “day of the Lord” (Acts 2:16–21; cp. Joel 2:28–32). Paul used this to refer to Christ’s return to earth (2 Thess 2:1). “Whether the day is the parousia, or the climax of history and all things as in the ‘day of God’ when the dissolution of the heavens occurs (2 Pet 3:12), the ‘day’ will be characterized by the unquestioned and unmistakable presence of Almighty God.”104
Martens neatly summarizes the meaning of the day of the Lord. It is a “day of God’s vindication” when he is victorious over evil once and for all (Isa 2:17). It is a day when the questions of theodicy will be answered. The havoc evil has caused will be undone; “ambiguities will be resolved”; “evil will be trounced and evildoers will in the end receive their due.” Finally, the prospect of the day coming “calls on believers especially to live in its light.”105
The last half of v. 7 is filled with irony. The Lord had prepared a sacrifice106for his guests. His guests were the enemies of Israel; the sacrifice to be slaughtered was Israel itself. “To speak of the day of the Lord as a day of sacrifice (1:7–8) places it within the long biblical tradition that where there is sin there must also be death—and this because Yahweh is the Holy One.”107
Zephaniah used the normal language associated with sacrifice. The word for “sacrifice”(zebaḥ)is almost always used of a “sacrifice of slaughtered sheep, goat, or cattle to create communion between the god to whom the sacrifice is made and the partners of the sacrifice, and communion between the partners themselves.”108Thus Zephaniah “takes the word of divine grace (the provision of a sacrifice for sin) and makes it the vehicle of the message of wrath: those who have long despised the sacrifice that God provides become the sacrifice their sin merits.”109
Thus Patterson concludes: “The metaphor of the sacrificial banquet reinforces the announcement of the Day of the Lord and provides a ray of hope in the clouds of doom. As guests called to a sacrificial feast were to come with their uncleanness removed, so the Judahites are urged to respond to the invitation of Yahweh their host. Although judgment was coming, there was still time. By acknowledging God as their master and by responding in fear to the prospect of judgment in repentance from sin and repudiation of idolatry, God’s people could join a believing remnant in coming to the feast as guests acceptable to Him. There was yet hope.… Guests who remained unrepentant, and hence unclean, would be disqualified and would, like those in Jehu’s day (2 Kgs 10:18–28), discover that they were not only invited guests but also victims.”110
95The specific expression “the day of Yahweh” occurs sixteen times: Isa 13:6, 9; Ezek 13:5; Joel 1:15; 2:1, 11; 3:4; 3:14; Amos 5:18, 20; Obad 15; Zeph 1:7, 14; Mal 3:17, but “the day” with several different modifications also describe this day. See E. Jenni, “יוֹםyômday,”TLOT2:537–39, and the list of terms by Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 272–73.
96W. W. VanHorn, “An Investigation ofיום יהוהas It Relates to the Message of Amos” (Ph.D. diss, New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary, 1987), 173.
97Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 310.
98G. von Rad, “The Origin of the Concept of the Day of Yahweh,”JSS4 (1959): 97–108; for a pungent description of holy war expectation and experience, see Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 66. Robertson uses the imagery of Zephaniah 1 to connect the day of the Lord to the covenants of Noah, Abraham, and Moses (NICOT, 268). This may be placing too much weight on the language of images rather than on historical and theological references in the text.
99E. A. Martens, “Day of the Lord, God, Christ, the,”EDBT, 148.
100Jenni, “יוֹםyômday,” 2:539.
101Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 310) prints an extensive list of passages for the day of the Lord as present (Joel 1:15), near future (Isa 2:12–22), future-eschatological (Isa 13:6, 9), and primarily eschatological (Joel 3:14–15). Achtemeier (Nahum–Malachi, 66–67) lists eleven characteristics of the day of the Lord.
102Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:918.
103House,Zephaniah, 148.
104Martens, “Day of the Lord, God, Christ, the,” 147.
105Ibid., 149, with reference to 2 Pet 3:11.
106Watts (Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum Habakkuk and Zephaniah, 159) says “sacrifice” is to be interpreted as “slaughter” for a feast rather than for a ritual sacrifice. This is part of his theory that the book was read at a great festival day. Thus for him the guests are the worshipers in the temple. The “king’s sons” in v. 8 are sons of the god Melek, that is, cult officials of the god Melek. Foreign clothes are garments used in heathen worship. Stepping on the threshold becomes climbing up to the temple terrace or the holy of holies in astral worship. Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 178) says placing v. 8 in the realm of pagan gods and their officials “seems farfetched and improbable.” Achtemeier (Nahum–Malachi, 67–68) says the sacrifice is not that which follows a battle but is preparation for holy war, a consecration of the soldiers prior to battle, and a prelude to the call to repent in 2:1–3. Thus Judah is not the guest to be sacrificed. The guests are the mysterious members of God’s army. Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 177–78) is probably more on target when he writes: “The Judeans would not eat the sacrificial meal Yahweh was preparing, however, for the implication of Zephaniah’s words is that Judah would be the sacrifice (cf. Isa 34:6–7; Jer 46:10)! Yawheh’s guests, consecrated by him to eat the sacrifice (see 1 Sam 16:5 for this practice) would not be the Judeans, but either the foreign armies he would bring against Judah (Isa 13:3–5) or the birds and beasts of prey who would feed on the corpses of the dead (Ezek 39:17–20).”
107Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:917.
108HALOT, 262.
109Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:917. The verbזבחis also used metaphysically “for slaying idolatrous priests on their own altars (1 Kgs 13:2 with 2 Kgs 23:20)” and “for slaughtering the rebellious nations in judgment as a feast for the scavenger birds (Ezek 39:17–19)” (R. E. Averbeck, “זבח,”NIDOTTE1:1069).
110Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 311–12.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 425–428.
7-13절에서 여호와의 날은 반복되어 사용된다. 8절은 여호와의 희생의 날, 9절과 10절은 그 날, 12절은 그 때로 표현하고 있다.
8-9절) 여호와의 희생의 날에 방백들과 왕자들과 이방인의 옷을 입은 자들이 벌을 받을 것이며 그 날에 문턱을 뛰어 넘는 모든 자, 자기 주인의 집을 포악과 거짓으로 채운 자들은 벌을 받을 것이다.
본문의 방백과 왕의 아들들은 요시야 시대로 본다면 요시야의 아들들이라기 보다는, 그는 즉위할 때 나이가 어렸으므로, 암살당한 아몬의 형제들 혹은 아몬의 자녀들이라고 볼 수 있다. 또한 이방인의 옷을 입고 있는 자는 유다 사람으로 앗수르 사람의 문화와 가치관을 적극적으로 받아들인 혼합주의자를 말하는 것이다. 이방인의 옷을 입는 것 자체가 문제가 될 수 없다. 하지만 여기서 말하는 바는 이스라엘의 풍습을 버리고, 하나님을 섬긴다고 하면서 이방인의 삶의 방식을 따르고 선호했다는 것을 의미한다. 더 나아가서 이스라엘의 종교 예식 속에 이방의 풍습이 깊숙히 들어와서 오염을 시키고 있는 것이다.
그 날에 문턱을 뛰어넘고 자기 주인의 집에 포악과 거짓을 채운 자들이 벌을 받을 것이다. 문지방을 건너 뛰는 자들이란 삼상 5:5에 다곤이 여호와의 법궤 앞에서 목이 부러진 다음부터 블레셋 사람들이 다곤 신전의 문지방을 밟지 않고 건너는 풍습이 생겼다는 것에 근거하여 다곤을 섬기는, 블레셋 사람의 풍습을 따르는 자들이라고 볼 수 있다. 이처럼 이방인의 옷을 입고 이방 종교의 풍습을 따르는 이들을 여호와의 날에 여호와께서 심판하신 다는 것이다.
9절의 포악과 거짓은 ‘폭력과 속임수’를 의미하는 부사적인 어구이다. 그렇다면 이 포악과 거짓이 가득찬 주인의 집이 어디일 까? 주인을 누구로 보느냐에 따라서 다르게 해석될 수 있다. 이 주인을 하나님으로 본다면 여호와의 성전이 되고, 주인을 왕으로 본다면 왕국이 되는 것이다. 또한 주인을 이방의 신으로 본다면 이방신의 신전이 될 것이다. 하지만 8-9절의 흐름속에서 읽을 때 이는 ‘여호와의 성전’으로 보는것이 가장 타당해 보인다. 여호와의 희생의 날에 이방의 옷을 입은 자들이 ‘주인의 집, 여호와의 성전’을 포악과 거짓으로 채운 것에 대해서 하나님께서 벌하시겠다라는 것이다.
- 8절) Zephaniah used the same word for sacrifice as in the previous verse. The Lord would punish the princes and the king’s sons. They would be fit for the sacrifice which the Lord planned. God’s promise to punish literally states: “I will visit upon the princes and upon the sons of the king.” In the Old Testament the verbpāqad, “to visit,” often means to visit for good or to visit in judgment, as is the case in this instance.116
The “princes” refers to those members of the court who were the leaders of the government.117“The king’s sons” probably did not mean literal sons but the royal family whether princes or others connected with the royal court.118
The time period for the delivery of Zephaniah’s message impacts the interpretation of the royal family. Why is the king not mentioned? Was this delivered early in Josiah’s reign when Josiah (640–609 b.c.) was only a child (cp. 2 Kgs 22:1)? If this was the case, the king may have been left out of the punishment because of his youth or because of his righteousness (2 Kgs 22:2). If Zephaniah descended from royal ancestry,119he would have known the conduct of the court and the reasons for God’s visiting them in punishment.
Nothing particularly could be wrong with wearing the clothes of foreigners except for what that meant in Judah at the time.120Since the time of Manasseh (687–641 b.c.), Judah suffered under the vassalage of Assyria. Judah saw Israel overcome and taken into exile in 722 b.c. Later, Judah itself felt the power of Assyria. Manasseh, whether to appease Assyria or because of his own evil, erected Assyrian monuments and altars to other gods even in the temple of the Lord in Jerusalem (2 Kgs 21:3–8). Manasseh was deliberately attempting “to turn the religion of Yahwism into another polytheism.”121Later, when Josiah began his reforms, he began to remove Assyrian influences from the temple.
Wearing the clothes of foreigners signified the desire to be like the Assyrians and others in every way, including the worship of pagan gods.122“The princely households [were] frivolously dazzled by supposed foreign sophistication.… The issue at stake was the distinctiveness of the people of God.”123For this reason, God determined to visit those in judgment who clad themselves in foreign clothes.
116V. P. Hamilton, “פָּקַד(paqad),” etc.TWOT2:731–32.
117Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 316) shows thatשָׂרִיםcan include tribal chieftains (Num 21:18); court officials (1 Chr 22:17); district supervisors (1 Kgs 20:14–15); city officials (Judg 8:6); military leaders (1 Kgs 2:5; 2 Kgs 1:9–14); and religious leaders (Ezra 8:24).
118See Roberts,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 178; Rudolph, Micha, Nahum, Habakuk, Zephanja, 267. Robertson (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 275–76) contends that Zephaniah intentionally omitted reference to an obedient king Josiah and intentionally condemned his sons, three of whom would eventually be king of Judah; Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 317) dates the book early and refers the king’s sons to sons of Josiah’s predecessor Ammon.
119See Introduction: “Zephaniah, the Man.”
120Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 178–79) says one could interpret “the prophet’s objection to foreign apparel as an attack on Judah’s loss of self-identity as the people of Yahweh. Defenders of traditional culture often regard the importation of foreign styles in clothing as both a sign and a cause of corruption in the society’s fundamental values.” Roberts, however, prefers the religious interpretation.
121G. E. Wright,Biblical Archaeology, rev. ed (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1962), 175.
122Robertson insists that foreign clothing marked priests of each group of foreign gods so that the condemnation here is still of foreign worship (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 276).
123Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:919, who points to Israel’s own national regulations of dress (Num 15:38; Deut 22:12) linked to religious loyalties (Num 15:39–40).
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 429–430.
9절) What exactly does it mean to “avoid stepping on the threshold”?124The NIV footnote equates this practice with the worship of Dagon among the Philistines as found in 1 Sam 5:4–5.125Many pagans believed that evil spirits resided at the threshold, waiting for someone to step on it and let them slip in.126This interpretation relates the practice in Judah with pagan worship,127perhaps for the same reasons as wearing foreign clothes in the preceding verse.128“They observe the minutia of a senseless pagan law, but then run rampant over the basic ordinances of God in his own house.”129
In this regard (that is, equating stepping over the threshold with wearing foreign clothes), some biblical scholars see vv. 8 and 9 as a chiasmus, where the first part of v. 8 goes with the last part of v. 9, and the two middle sections relate to one another. This is a feature often used in Hebrew literature and an effective means of communication. If the verses form a chiasmus, then those officials of v. 8 would be the same people who filled their master’s houses with violence and deceit in v. 9.130
The second half of v. 9 speaks of those who fill (lit.) “the house of their masters” with (or by) violence and deceit. “The house of their masters” could mean the temple of a pagan god (NIV) or the house of the king, which would have been filled by killing and stealing. “Violence and deceit” is an adverbial phrase in Hebrew without a preposition. The phrase may be understood as a metonymy referring togoodsobtainedby“violence and deceit,” which were deposited in “the house of their masters.”131
124Motyer determines that “הַמִּפְתָּן(the threshold) “remains imperfectly understood” (ibid.)
NIV New International Version
125Motyer says, “Zephaniah replaces the sober ‘do not step on the threshold’ (1 Sam 5:5) with a deliberately trivializing word in order to caricature the antics introduced into the Lord’s worship” (ibid.). Roberts summarizes textual and exegetical attempts to define the termהַדּוֹלֵג, “the one who leaps” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 174–75). J. N. B. Heflin interprets the phrase in terms of the last half of the verse as referring to a call for social justice. “Henchmen” or associates of the political leaders are eager to carry out violence and deceit so they hurry over the thresholds of victims’ houses in their hurry to plunder and rob and cheat (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, BSC (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985], 134). Similarly L. Walker, “Zephaniah,” EBC 7:547.
127Patterson also adopts this view with some hesitation (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 312–13).
128Roberts,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 179; Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:919: Just as the princes affected foreign dress, so the priests imported alien religious fetishes.
129Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 278.
130J. D. W. Watts (Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum Habakkuk and Zephaniah, 159–60) takes the passage to mean those who climb on the holy of holies, possibly a common practice in astral worship.
NIV New International Version
131Motyer (“Zephaniah,” 3:920) sees violence here as priests violently mishandling the law, while the deceit is priests deceiving those “who trustfully come for guidance” (Mal 2:7). Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 179) shows that the ambiguity of house/lords is not significant since the temple would be part of the royal complex, and the king would ultimately control temple treasures. “Violence and deceit” could refer to the religious abuses of Manasseh; then the “house” would mean “temple.”
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 430–431.
10-11절) 그 날에 어문과 제 2구역, 작은 산들에서 울부짖는 소리와 무너지는 소리가 날 것이다. 막데스 주민들아 너희는 슬피 울라. 가나안 백성이 다 패망하고 은을 거래하던 자들이 끊어졌느니라.
앞서 이스라엘 백성들은 여호와의 전안에 이방의 풍습을 들여왔고 포악과 거짓을 채웠을 때 여호와께서 벌을 내리셨다. 이 때에 곳곳에서 통곡의 소리가 울려퍼지게 될 것이다.
‘어문’은 물고기 문으로 예루살렘 북쪽에 있어서 예루살렘으로 가장 쉽게 들어올 수 있는 관문이었다.(대하 33:14; 느 3:3; 12:39) 느헤미야서에 의하면 이 문은 옛 문과 양 문 사이에 있었다. 이 문이 예루살렘의 생선 시장으로 통하기에 이런 이름이 붙여졌을 것이다.
둘째 구역은 도시의 서쪽 언덕에 위치해 성전을 내려다보고 있었고 부유한 상류층이 이곳에 살았던 것으로 알려져 있다. 특히 요시야가 제사장을 보내 하나님의 뜻을 물었던 여선지자 훌다가 이 지역에 살았다.(왕하 22:14; 대하 34:22)
11절의 막데스가 무엇을 뜻하는지는 분명하지 않다. 우리말 성경은 고유명사로 지역의이름으로 나타내지만, 공동번역은 방앗간으로 번역하고 있고 탈굼은 기드론 시내라고 번역한다.
스바냐 1:11 (NIV)
11Wail, you who live in the market district; all your merchants will be wiped out, all who trade with silver will be destroyed.
스바냐 1:11 (NKSV)
11막데스에 사는 너희는 슬피 울어라. 장사하는 백성은 다 망하고, 돈을 거래하는 자들은 끊어졌다.
하지만 NIV는 이곳을 상가 지역이라고 번역하고 있다. 어문과 둘째 구역, 언덕은 시장과 주택지구를 의미하는 곳으로 성의 곳곳에서 울음 소리가 들릴 것이라는 것이다. 따라서 막데스는 상가 지역이고, 가나안 백성이라는 의미는 페니키아 인들로 장사하는 사람들을 의미하는 표현이다. 말하자면 성의 곳곳에서 특히 장사하는 백성을 망하고 돈을 거래하는 자들이 끊어질 것이라고 말한다. 이는 경제적인 충격이 심할 것을 말하는 것이다.
10절) On the day of the Lord’s judgment the sounds of attack and the cries of the people would be heard from around the city. The “cry,” “wailing,” and “a loud crash” are parallel terms. The “cry” and the “wailing” both describe the sounds of hurting people, while the “loud crash” from the hills may describe the sound of buildings falling at the onslaught of the enemy. “Thepleadingandhowlingarising from the areas of thefish gateand thesecond quarterof Jerusalem give expression to the utter despair of a people who have lost all hope in life. The judgment of God has now entered their own private district of town.”132
The “Fish Gate” (Neh 3:3; 12:39) and the “New Quarter”133are not known precisely, but most interpreters assume their location in the northern section of the city. P. J. Nel agreed with the northwest location of the gate, citing the fishing trade from the Phoenician city of Tyre. “According to Neh 3:8 and 12:39 the Fishgate is located near the ‘Old Gate’ and the ‘sheep Gate.’ The latter is located toward the North-east.”134
The geography of Jerusalem and of Palestine determined that most trouble would come from the north, the supposed area of the Fish Gate and the New Quarter. Palestine served as a land bridge with the Mediterranean Sea to the west and the desert to the east. All commerce was forced to follow the north-south trade routes in Palestine. Egypt lay to the south, and the other great powers (Assyria, Babylon, Syria, and non-Semitic peoples) had access to Palestine only from the north. Jeremiah spoke prominently of judgment that would come from the north. The “foe from the north” would bring destruction on Jerusalem (Jeremiah 4–6).135The Fish Gate “is chosen for its suitability to picture the final onslaught.”136
“Appropriate to the secular society that Jerusalem has become, God’s destruction of his sinful people will start not at the temple but in the commercial quarter.… There in her commercial center—her ancient Wall Street—Jerusalem will experience God’s first attack.”137The loud crash from the hills is indefinite enough to call forth several explanations. It may be the echoes of war’s devastation as the enemy ransacks the houses and business places and even the temple of Jerusalem.138Robertson views it as breaking down of the idols in the high places around Jerusalem.139
132RobertsonNahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 278.
133G. A. Herion (“Second Quarter,”ABD5:1065) says: “It has long been suspected that this new addition to Jerusalem was constructed opposite the Tyropoeon Valley on the hill W of the old city of David and SW of the Temple Mount sometime during the reign of Hezekiah.… This expansion would have been designed to handle the increasing number of Israelite and Judean refugees fleeing the devastation of the Assyrian army.” He notes of archaeological confirmation by Avigad’s excavations including a defense wall, the extension nearly quadrupling Jerusalem’s residential neighborhoods, bringing Jerusalem’s population to twenty-five thousand. Cp. the older description of J. Gray,I and II Kings, OTL, 2d ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1970), 726–27, quoted by Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 317. Heflin sees the four geographical points as representing the four quarters of the city or all of the city (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 135).
134P. J. Nel, “Structural and Conceptual Strategy in Zephaniah, Chapter 1,”JNSL15 (1989): 161. He concludes that the “hills” referred to the hilly area at the southern and eastern edges of the city. He also concluded that the “New Quarter” was located in the southwest. In these locations he saw the four wind directions, showing a total onslaught against Jerusalem.
135R. A. Bowman, “The North Country,”IDB3:560.
136Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:920.
137Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 70.
138PattersonNahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 313, referring to T. Laetsch,The Minor Prophets(St. Louis: Concordia, 1956), 361.
139Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 278–79.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 432–433.
11절) In ancient cities, different trades and merchants often set up shop near one another (Jer 37:21, “the street of the bakers”). The “mortar” (market district, NIV), from a word meaning “to pound,” may have referred to an area hollowed out where merchants gathered or to a vessel in which food could be pounded.142Since the following line refers to merchants, the NIV may give the best rendering by making this a place where commerce was carried out, probably in the Tyropoeon valley.143
In a number of different passages in the Old Testament, “Canaan” (kĕnaʿan, translated “merchants” here) and “Canaanites” referred to “merchants” or “traders.”144The people of Canaan and the Phoenicians in particular were stereotyped as a merchant people. Motyer is probably correct in seeing a double meaning here: “They were people of the Lord, but in business they had become Canaanites!”145
In order to complete their financial transaction, traders weighed out silver using a system of weights and measures. Zephaniah called on the people to wail because the merchants would be “wiped out” (or “silenced”) and the market place with its busyness from merchants trading would be “cut off” (NIV, “ruined”). “The cutting off ofall the dealers in silvermeant that the city as a center of culture, trade, luxury, beauty, and craftsmanship would come to an end.”146The judgment of God against Judah would reach to all parts of society, especially to those who might be more tempted to trust in their own ability, creativity, or ingenuity. Motyer’s warning here is appropriate: “Zephaniah is not showing an animus against trade or money-making. Rather he chooses a place normally alive with the buzz of conversation and humming with activity as a foil for the silence that will follow the devastation.”147
NIV New International Version
142From the earliest translations the termהַמַּכְתֵּשׁhas not been understood, being rendered as “pillars” (Vg), a proper noun (Syr, KJV), the Kidron River or brook (Tg), mortar (NASB, NRSV), hollow (NJB), market district (NIV, NLT, NCV), Lower Town (REB), Lower Hollow (CEV). See the discussion of Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 317–18. G. A. Herion (“Mortar, The,”ABD4:905) associates the time frame of the period of Josiah, its mention here with the Second Quarter, and the root meaning of “hollow,” perhaps indicating a bowl-shaped depression. From this he concludes: “It is possible that this neighborhood was part of the W annex to the city of David and only came to be regarded as a “mortar” after neighborhoods were established on the eastern slopes of the W hill. In this case the “mortar” would likely be associated with (some portion of) the Tyropoeon Valley, which lay outside the city until the eighth century b.c.” Cf. Berlin,Zephaniah, 87.
NIV New International Version
143Patterson supports this view (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 318) and quotes G. A. Smith, who placed the area in the upper part of the Tyropoeon Valley, an identification supported by a number of other sources. Robertson sees this as the all-inclusive term for Jerusalem: “Encircled by higher hills, Jerusalem itself may be compared to a mortar, a pounding place. God in his judgment shall grind the whole of the city as though it were encased in a mortar” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 279).
144BDB, 488–89.כְּנַעַןis also used with the sense “merchants” and “traders” in Prov 31:24; Isa 23:8; Ezek 16:29; 17:4; Hos 12:7 [Hb. 12:8]; Zech 14:21. See Y. Aharoni,The Land of the Bible: A Historical Geography, trans. A. F. Rainey (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1967), 61.
145Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:920.
NIV New International Version
146Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 279.
147Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:920. He adds: “In the Bible wealth is not a vice any more than poverty is a virtue, but the Bible asks three questions concerning wealth: How was it acquired? How is it being used? What is the attitude of the possessor to the possessions?”
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 433–434.
12-13절) 그 때에 하나님께서 등불을 들고 심판할 자들을 두루 찾아 벌을 하실 것이다. 하나님께서 찾아 벌하실 사람들은 ‘찌꺼기 같이 가라앉아서 마음속에 스스로 이르기를 여호와께서는 복도 내리지 아니하시고 화도 내리지 아니하신다’라고 말하는 이들이다. 찌꺼기 같이 가라앉은 이들이란 술을 제조하는 과정에서 남은 찌꺼기를 의미한다. 포도주를 만들때는 포도를 밟은 다음 찌꺼기가 가라앉으면 기다렸다가 찌꺼기가 가라앉고나서 따라서 술을 만들게 되는데 그런 찌거기 같은 이들이 있다는 것이다.
12절의 찌꺼기를 히브리어로는 ‘세메르’인데 이는 포도주의 잔여물, 찌끼를 의미한다. 그러니까 하나님께서 여호와 하나님이 복도, 화도 내리지 않으시는 하나님이라고 말하는 이들, 겉으로는 신앙생활을 한다고 하지만 냉담하여 하나님을 인정하지 않는 이들을 두루 찾으신다는 것이다. 자기 부와 명예에 도취되어 하나님을 버리고 자신을 찾는 이들을 하나님께서는 등불을 들고 찾으심으로 심판하신다는 것이다.
아이러니하게도 그들의 재물이 노략되며 그들의 집이 황폐하게 될 것이다. 그들은 집을 건축하지만 그곳에 살지 못할 것이고 포도원을 가꾸지만 그 포도주를 마시지 못하게 될 것이다.
12절) 1:12Here is the central indictment of the book.148Zephaniah promised that the Lord would search out the “complacent,” that is, all those who are self-secure and undisturbed. The NIV uses this interpretation149to explain the meaning of the Hebrew metaphor associated with wine making. The Hebrew reads literally, “I will visit upon the men who are thickening150on their dregs [i.e., like wine].”
In the wine-making process, fermented wine has to be poured from one vessel to another to separate the wine from the sediment (lees or “dregs”). If the wine is allowed to settle too long, it thickens and is ruined (cp. Jer 48:11–12, where the image is used of wine that is poured off too soon).151The metaphor in the Book of Zephaniah refers to those who have lived with uninterrupted prosperity and have become complacent. These are people who have deified themselves, thinking that their might and the power of their hands have gotten them wealth (Deut 8:10–18). “Many of Jerusalem’s citizens had remained in their apostate lifestyle so long that they had become satisfied with it and then grown indifferent to genuine piety.”152Moses warned the people of the danger of becoming proud and forgetting the Lord who brought them out of the land of Egypt (Deut 8:14).
“General apathy about God exists in the land, which the writer conveys with sight and sound imagery.”153God promised to make a thorough search154of the city for those living in complacency. Invaders searched captured cities with small clay lamps, looking for any item of value. God would make the same kind of search for those who lived in practical atheism, believing that God did neither good nor evil.155In so doing Zephaniah may appear to deny God’s basic characteristic as omniscient, all-knowing. In truth, he does just the opposite. He shows God can and will find everything about you. Nothing escapes God’s attention (cp. Ps 139:1). “No absentee God, He will send an invading force that will search out and plunder Jerusalem. The implementation of the Lord’s proclamation will come so quickly that all who have lived in pursuit of ill-gotten gain will not survive to enjoy their wealth.… In their preoccupation with self and riches they will lose them both (cf. Luke 12:16–21).”156As Achtemeier summarizes the teaching here: “In such societies, human beings have committed the ultimate idolatry—the final sin of trying to make themselves their own gods (cf. Gen 3:5).”157
While giving acknowledgment to the existence of God, many people ignore his lordship. In the modern mind “God” is a nebulous concept, lacking the ability to effect good or evil. People who think in this way might not question the existence of God but seriously question whether or not God works.
The faithful among the people of Israel knew the work of God. He worked to bring the world into existence, and he continues to work in his world. The prophets of the Old Testament, like the Christian authors of holy Scripture, affirmed the power of God to effect change as well as the will of God to work in his world. The Lord God works in history to accomplish his sovereign purpose.
148See Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 69.
NIV New International Version
149Motyer (“Zephaniah,” 921) notes that the NIV here follows BHS in emendingהָאֲנָשִׁים, “men” toהַשַּׁאֲנַנִּים, “secure, complacent, undisturbed ones.” Motyer’s strong language may well be deserved here and in so many places where emendation is done for meter or parallelism: this “only proves that emendation can be insidious. The idea is suitable (though sufficiently present without being labored), but the change lacks manuscript evidence.”
150קפאoccurs elsewhere only in Exod 15:8 and Job 10:10. It refers to something that stiffens, thickens, or congeals (HALOT, 1117).
151D. J. Clark and H. A. Hatton,A Handbook on the Books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah(New York: UBS, 1989), 156. On the use in Jer 48:11–12 cf. Berlin,Zephaniah, 88.
152Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 314–15. He explains that the sin is “one of indifference that goes beyond the smug self-satisfaction suggested by the word ‘complacency’ to an attitude that has hardened into deliberate disregard for the Lord and His standards” (p. 318). Roberts adds: “They had been secure so long in their wealth, despite their means of obtaining it, that they no longer took seriously any thought that Yahweh might affect the outcome of business or politics. They were self-sufficient, self-made men, and God was not a factor in their calculations (cf. Jas 4:13–17)” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 180–81). According to Berlin, “the people have become mired in their drinking and indulgent lifestyle” (Zephaniah, 87–88).
153House,Zephaniah, 58. Patterson says: “If not in theory, at least in practice, the people of Judah behaved like full-fledged pagans” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 315).
154Motyer explains that thepielverbאֱחַפֵּשׁhere is “a true intensive,” rendering “I will busy myself searching through” (“Zephaniah,” 3:921).
155Motyer explains that the contrast between good and evil here is a Hebraic way of expressing totality by means of contrast, the conclusion being that God does nothing at all (ibid., 3:920).
156Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 315.
157Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 69.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 434–436.
당시 이스라엘은 앗수르의 풍습을 따르면서 그 안에서 기득권을 누리며 살아가는 사람들이 있었다. 하나님께서는 풍요로움에 빠져서 하나님을 잊어버린 이들을 심판하실 것이다. 이 심판의 날이 임할 때 곳곳에는 울음 소리가 울려퍼질 것이다. 지금의 여의도 증권가나 강남의 테헤란로, 혹은 미국의 월스트리트에 주님께서 나타나셔서 거래하는 자들을 끊으실 때, 포도주에 취해서 스스로 만족해 있던 이들, 그래서 하나님을 찾지 않는 이들을 찾아오셔서 그들의 것을 취하심으로 심판을 내리신 다는 것이다.
1 The word of the Lord that came to Zephaniah the son of Cushi, son of Gedaliah, son of Amariah, son of Hezekiah,ain the days ofbJosiah the son of Amon, king of Judah.
The Coming Judgment on Judah
2 c“I will utterly sweep away everything
from the face of the earth,” declares the Lord.
3 “I will sweep awaydman and beast;
I will sweep away the birds of the heavens
anddthe fish of the sea,
andethe rubble1with the wicked.
I willfcut off mankind
from the face of the earth,” declares the Lord.
4 “I will stretch out my hand against Judah
and against all the inhabitants of Jerusalem;
gand I will cut off from this place the remnant of Baal
and the name of the idolatrous priests along with the priests,
5 hthose who bow down on the roofs
to the host of the heavens,
ithose who bow down and swear to the Lord
and yet swear byjMilcom,2
6 kthose who have turned back from following the Lord,
1절) 선지서의 첫 구절은 본 서의 장르, 예언의 시기, 예언자에 대한 소개를 구체적으로 다루고 있다.
먼저 예언의 기간은 아몬의 아들 유다왕 요시야의 시대이다.
예언을 한 선지자를 소개하면서는 특별히 4대까지 올라가서 그가 히스기야의 4대손임을 구체적으로 밝힌다.
도한 스바냐에게 임한 여호와의 말씀이라는 표현을 통해서 이것이 하나님께서 주신 예언의 말씀임을 분명하게 밝힌다.
스바냐가 유다왕 요시야때에 사역을 했다고 하면 그는 나훔과 예레미야와 같은 시대에 사역했던 선지자이다.
‘여호와의 말씀’(다바르 야훼)이라는 표현은 구약에서 242회 등장하는데 이중에 225회는 선지자들과 연관되어 사용되었다. 이는 선지자들의 메시지가 어디로부터 유래한 것인지를 알려주는 전형적인 표현으로 그들이 전한 메시지의 독특성과 권위를 강조하는 표현이다. 지금 선지자들이 선포하는 메시지, 말씀은 세상의 창조주이시며 심판주이신 여호와 하나님께서 직접 주신 것이다.
스바냐가 일반적이지 않게 자신의 계보를 4대까지 자세하게 언급하는 이유는 이 계보의 마지막에 언급된 히스기야와 자신을 연결시키기 위한 것으로 보인다. 이는 히스기야가 대중들에게 잘 알려진 히스기야 왕으로 추정한다. 그는 이사야 선지자가 사역하던 시기의 유다의 왕으로 요시야의 종교개혁이 히스기야의 종교개혁과 그 성격이 비슷한 것을 통해서 알 수 있다. 스바냐는 종교개혁을 진행하고 있는 요시야에게 여호와를 향한 열심으로 그 일을 할 것을 격려하며 이미 선조인 히스기야왕도 이러한 일을 했다라는 사실을 상기시키고 있는 것이다.
선지자의 이름, 스바냐는 ‘여호와께서 숨기시다. 보호하시다. 귀하게 여기시다’라는 의미이다. 여호와 하나님께서 소중히 여기시기 때문에 보호하시기 위해 숨기신다는 의미이다. 온 세상에 여호와의 날이 임하여 심판이 임할 때에 하나님께서는 당신의 사랑하시는, 소중히 여기시는 백성들을 숨기실 것이기 때문이다.
히스기야는 여호와는 나의 힘, 아마랴는 여호와께서 말씀하시다, 그다랴는 여호와는 위대하시다라는 의미를 지닌다. 이로 보아서 스바냐는 여호와를 매우 사랑했던 집안 출신임을 알 수 있다. 지금 이스라엘이 부패하여 심판을 받을만큼 타락해 있지만 그의 집안은 세상과 구별되어 하나님만을 사랑하며 살아갔던 남은자들이었던 것이다.
- 1:1Most prophetic books in the Old Testament begin with a title verse that introduces the prophet, often briefly describing the time period of the prophet’s ministry and how the message came to the prophet. The title verse to Zephaniah’s prophecy describes the prophet’s message as the word of the Lord that came to Zephaniah in the days of Josiah, king of Judah.2
Several prophetic books begin in a fashion similar to the Book of Zephaniah. “The word of the Lord” is the most common way to describe the message that came to a prophet (cp. Jer 1:2; Hos 1:1; Joel 1:1; Jonah 1:1; Mic 1:1; Hag 1:1; Zech 1:1; Mal 1:1). It emphasizes the uniqueness of the prophet’s message—his message came from the Lord. The content of the prophetic literature illustrates how the prophets spoke for God in such a unique way as God’s messengers that they prefaced their messages with “This is what the Lord says.” Zephaniah’s message followed the prophetic pattern. He received the word of the Lord and proclaimed that message when Josiah reigned as king of Judah.
The expression “word of the Lord” occurs 242 times in the Old Testament, 225 of these being a technical term for prophetic verbal revelation.3Often the expression also appears in the “call to attention” formula4that opens a public presentation and seeks to attract the audience’s attention (Num 12:6; Pss 50:7; 81:9; Isa 1:10; Jer 10:1; Hos 4:1; Amos 3:1, 13; 5:1; 7:16; 8:4; Mic 6:2; Jer 28:15). The word is the Lord’s voluntary choice to make himself known, expressing his thought and his will. Through his word God shows the activity in which he is involved in his world. Once spoken, the word works out its message, never returning to God without having achieved its purpose (Isa 55:10–11).5
The word is good (Josh 21:45; 23:14–15; 1 Kgs 8:56; Isa 39:8; Jer 29:10; 33:14; Zech 1:13); upright (Ps 33:4; Neh 9:13); true (2 Sam 7:28; 1 Kgs 17:24); reliable (1 Kgs 8:26; 1 Chr 17:23; 2 Chr 1:9; 6:17); eternal (Ps 119:89); and even holy (Jer 23:9). His word brings creation into being (Pss 33:6, 9; 104:7; 147:15–18). Once spoken the word of God stands forever (Isa 40:8). God watches to ensure that his word is realized in history (Jer 1:12; cp. Deut 18:22; Jer 28:9). This concept and understanding of the word of God “points out the absolute uniqueness of Israel’s religion on the basis of personal contact with Yahweh—the transcendent, sovereign, creator God.”6
The word is what characterizes a prophet just as wisdom does a wise man and torah does a priest (Jer 18:18). Thus people can go to a prophet seeking God (1 Sam 9:9; 2 Kgs 3:11) or seeking his word (1 Sam 16:23; 1 Kgs 14:5; 22:5; Jer 37:17; 38:14; 42:2; Amos 8:12). Such word comes when one stands in the council of God (Jer 23:18). The expectation is that the word received in God’s council (cp. Isa 6) will be preached to the people (Jer 23:22, 28) and will act like a hammer smashing a rock to pieces (Jer 23:29). The message may be preserved in writing also (Jer 36:2). The prophet digested God’s word so that it became a vital part of his life (Jer 15:16).
Just because a prophet claims to have and to preach God’s word does not mean he has done so. He may have stolen the word (Jer 23:30) or preached a word that did not come from God (Jer 23:16–17; Ezek 13:6). The prophet may be deluded or deceived (Ezek 14:9). A prophet may faithfully deliver God’s word but not be believed or accepted (Jer 17:15; 29:19; 37:2; 44:16; Ezek 12:21–28; 33:30–31). The word can cause the prophet to suffer (Jer 20:8; 23:9).
The word is not guaranteed to Israel. The day will come when they will search and scurry to find it without results. They will suffer a famine of the word of God (Amos 8:11–12). Absence of God’s word is in itself judgment (1 Sam 28:15–16; Mic 3:6; Ezek 7:26). It is a burning fire that consumes the people (Jer 5:14).7
The word “came” may convey more significance than would normally be assumed. In Hebrew the verb can mean that Zephaniah experienced the word or that the word happened to the prophet. “The word of the Lord became a living reality to Zephaniah.”8Both ways of interpreting the word of the Lord that came to Zephaniah emphasize the unique nature of God’s word. “We know nothing of the processes involved. This is a work of God. We do know, however, that it was the experience of specially prepared people (Jer 1:4) who were brought into divine fellowship (Isa 6:5–8; Ezek 1:28–2:2) and within that fellowship made privy to divine secrets (Jer 23:12, 22; Amos 3:7). There was no crushing of human personality or overriding of human mental processes; rather the prophetic state lifted the individual into the presence of God. This experience made the prophets more truly human than they were before, so that they were enabled to receive his revelation.”9The word characterized Zephaniah’s preaching and gave him authority to speak dangerous words in high places.10“Zephaniah was inspired to receive, understand, and then express the divine word without tarnishing its divine reality and truth.”11
2J. Nogalski argues that the superscription has no historical worth, being a stereotyped product of the Deuteronomistic school, and is to be compared to the superscriptions in Hosea, Joel, Jonah, and Micah (Literary Precursors to the Book of the Twelve[Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1993], 176–78, 181–87); cp. R. R. Wilson,Prophecy and Society in Ancient Israel(Philadelphia: Fortress, 1980), 145–66.
3G. Gerleman, “דָּבָרdābārword,”TLOT1:330. In the Pentateuch the term appears in Gen 15:1, 4; Exod 9:20–21; Num 15:31; Deut 5:5. In the writing prophets it appears in the titles to books, quite rarely in prophetic address (Isa 1:10; 2:3=Mic 4:2; Hos 4:1; Amos 8:11–12) and in prophetic reports (Amos 7:16). At least 110 of the occurrences appear in the “Prophetic Word Formula—דָבָר יהוה+הָיָה+אֶל+ the name of a prophet or a pronoun standing for the prophet—the word of Yahweh came or occurred to … (1 Sam 15:10; 1 Kgs 6:11; Jer 1:4 11; 2:1; 7:1; 11:1; 33:19, 23; 35:12; 42:7; Ezek 6:1; 7:1; Hos 1:1; Joel 1:1; Mic 1:1).
4This consists of (1) a call to listen such asשִׁמְע֥וּ דְבַר־יְהוָ֖ה, “hear the word of Yahweh”; (2) a mention of those addressed such asבְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל, “sons of Israel”; and (3) an indication of what is to be heard such asכִּ֣י רִ֤יב לַֽיהוָה֙ עִם־יוֹשְׁבֵ֣י הָאָ֔רֶץ, “for Yahweh has a court case with the inhabitants of the land” (see Hos 4:1); cp. M. A. Sweeney,Isaiah 1–39 with an Introduction to Prophetic Literature, FOTL (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996), 544.
5Gerleman, “דָּבָרdābārword,” 1:331–32.
6H. D. Buckwalter, “Word,”EDBT, 828.
7See W. H. Schmidt, “דָּבַרdābhar,”TDOT3:103–25.
8J. A. Motyer, “Zephaniah,”The Minor Prophets, ed. T. E. McComiskey (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1998), 3:908.
9Ibid. Motyer notes further: “If the prophet is to say something that appalls (1:2–3), shocks (1:10), horrifies (2:9), or seems too good to be true (3:8), he needs to be sure of his ground; he needs the authority of the divine word.”
10Cp. R. D. Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, WEC (Chicago: Moody, 1991), 298.
11Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 908.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 406–408.
2-3절) 땅위의 모든 것을 진멸하시는 하나님, 여호와 하나님께서 사람과 짐승을 진멸하고 공중의 새와 바다의 고기와 거치게 하는 것과 악인들을 진멸하며 사람을 땅위에서 끊어버리겠다. 나 여호와의 말이다.
성경에서 '내가 땅 위의 모든 것을 진멸하겠다’라는 말씀으로 시작하는 책은 스바냐서가 유일하다. 이 메시지는 청중들에게 매우 충격적을 들렸을 것이다.
본문 2절에서 진멸하다라는 표현은 ‘아사프 아숩’이라는 표현으로 두개의 동사가 동시에 사용되었다. 첫번째 히브리어 동사인 ‘아사프’는 모으다, 저축하다라는 의미로 절대형 부정사로 동사 앞에 등장할 때는 강조형으로 사용된다. 그래서 확실히 모으리라라는 의미이며 뒤따르는 두번째 히브리어 동사는 ‘아숩’은 히필 미완료형 동사로 ‘파괴하다, 끝내다’라는 의미의 동사이다. 이 표현은 렘 8:13에서 동일하게 사용되었다.
예레미야 8:13
13여호와의 말씀이니라 내가 그들을 진멸하리니 포도나무에 포도가 없을 것이며 무화과나무에 무화과가 없을 것이며 그 잎사귀가 마를 것이라 내가 그들에게 준 것이 없어지리라 하셨나니
결국 이 두개의 동사의 의미를 다 살린다면 ‘내가 땅위에서 모든 것을 모아 진멸할 것이다’라는 의미이다.
또한 ‘땅 위에서’로 번역된 히브리어는 ‘페네 하 아다마’로 경작 가능한 땅을 의미하는데 이 위의 모든 것을 진멸하겠다라는 의미이다.
3절은 사람과 짐승, 하늘의 새들, 바다의 물고기들, 남을 넘어뜨리는 악한 자들, 사람을 멸절할 것이다 라고 말한다. 2절과 다르게 3절에서는 ‘아사프’는 사용되지 않고 ‘숩’만이 히필형으로 사용되어 파괴시키다라는 의미로 사용된다. 이는 하나남의 언약을 파기한 자들에게 내려지는 저주이다. 특히 본문은 사람, 가축, 공중의 새들, 바다의 물고기등이 파괴되는데 창 1장의 창조시에 하나님께서 5일째에 새와 물고기, 6일때에 짐승과 사람을 지으셨는데 이것들이 파괴된다는 것은 이 심판의 심각성을 보여주는 것이다. 그리고 물고기도 사라진다는 것은 노아의 홍수때보다 더 심각한 수위의 심판이 임할 것이라는 것을 보여주는 것이다. 하나님께서 창조하신 모든 피조물들이 멸절된다는 이 메시지는 청중들에게 엄청난 충격과 공포를 가져다 주었을 것이다.
본문에서 ‘거치게 하는 것과 악인들을 아울러 진멸할 것이다’라는 표현은 해석이 쉽지 않다.
스바냐 1:3(새번역)
3사람도 짐승도 쓸어 없애고, 공중의 새도 바다의 고기도 쓸어 없애겠다. 남을 넘어뜨리는 자들과 악한 자들을 거꾸러뜨리며, 땅에서 사람의 씨를 말리겠다. 나 주의 말이다.
이에 대해서 새번역은 ‘막셀라’를 사람으로 해석하고 있고 NIV는 'and the idols that cause the wicked to stumble.”로 번역하여 ‘악인들을 넘어뜨리게 만드는 우상을 멸정하리라’라고 해석한다. 정확한 해석은 어렵지만 결국 악인들을 멸절하시겠다라는 것이다.
4-6절) 하나님께서 유다와 예루살렘의 주민들 위에 손을 펴서 남아 있는 바알과 그마림이라는 이름의 제사장들과, 지붕에서 하늘의 별들에게 경배하는 자들과, 여호와께 맹세히면서 여전히 밀곰에게 맹세하며 경배하는 자들과 여호와를 따르는 것으로부터 돌아선 자들과 여호와를 찾지도 않고 구하지도 않는 자들을 멸절하리라.
‘하나님의 손’은 구약에서 200여 차례 등장하는데 이는 하나님의 무한한 능력을 상징하는 표현으로 출애굽 이후 주의 백성을 구원하는 능력의 손을(출3:19-20;4:17; 6:1;7:19; 13:3; 15:12;신4:34; 5:15; 6:21;7:8,19;9:26), 또한 주의 백성을 징계하는 손을 상징하기도 한다(사 9:12,17,21;10:4;렘21:5). 이스라엘을 구원한 손이 이제는 이스라엘이 행하는 우상숭배를 심판하는 손이 되고 있는 것이다. 이 하나님의 손을 피할 자는 아무도 없다.
본문에서 하나님께서 당신의 백성, 유다와 예루살렘의 모든 주민을 치시는 이유는 바로 그들이 우상을 섬기고 있기 때문이다. 1) 바알을 숭배하는 자들, 2) 우상을 숭배하는 거짓 제사장들, 3) 별들을 숭배하는 자들, 4) 여호와와 밀곰(말감)을 함께 섬기는 자들, 5) 여호와를 배반하고 따르지 않는 자들, 6) 여호와를 찾지도 구하지도 아니한 자들을 멸절하시겠다는 것이다.
앞선 3종류의 그룹은 하나님이 아니라 이교, 우상을 섬기고 있는 자들이며, 이후의 3그룹은 하나님을 믿는다고 하지만 온전히 하나님을 믿고 따르지 않는 종교적 복합주의자들이다. 유다의 문제는 이교에서 비롯된 예식을 여호와의 성전에서 행하고 있는 것이다. 이는 하나님이 어떤 분인지에 대한 온전한 인식, 지식의 부재에서 말미암은 것이다. 본문 4절에서 말하는 이곳(this place)는 하나님을 예배하는 성전이며 말씀이 선포되는 곳이다. 이스라엘 사람들은 예루살렘이 모든 세상의 중심이며, 성전은 에덴 동산을 상징한다고 생각했다. 그런데 여호와 하나님께서 이 곳을 치신다는 것이다. 하나님께서 창조의 중심인 이 곳, 성전을 치실만큼 이교의 영향이 이스라엘 중심부까지 침투해 들어왔다는 것이다. 이미 아세라 종교 예식에 필요한 물건들(왕하 23:4; 21:7), 태양신 샤마스에게 바쳐진 동상들(왕하 23:11)과 앗수르 신들에게 제물을 바치는 제단들(왕하 23:12; 21:4)등이 소장되어 있었다.
하나님께서 이 곳, 예루살렘 성전에서 바알을 비롯한 우상 숭배에 사용되는 기물들과 ‘그마림’이라고 불리는 바알 종교의 사제들도 모두 제거하신다라고 말씀하셨다. 그마림은 바알 종교를 비롯한 모든 이교들의 사제들을 부르는 호칭이었다.(왕하 23:5; 호 10:5)
당시 이스라엘은 하나님을 예배하면서 바알과 그마림, 이방의 제사장들이 함께 이방의 방식을 혼합시켰다. 바알 종교 예식은 흥분을 자아내며 성적인 쾌감을 누리게 하는 종교였다. 예배를 드리는 이들로 하여금 극도의 쾌감, 카타르시스를 경험하도록 한 것이다. 결국 우리의 예배가 진리이신 하나님을 예배하는 것이 아니라 종교적인 흥분과 카타르시스를 경험하는 것이 목적이 될 때 결국 우리는 다시금 바알을 섬기게 되는 것이다.
당시의 사람들은 별을 섬기는 것이 일반적이었다. 해와 달과 별을 숭배하고 별자리를 보고 점을 치는 것이 보편화되어 있었다. 하지만 하나님을 섬기는 이스라엘, 그리스도인들은 그럴 수 없다. 왜냐하면 해와 달과 별들은 신이 아니라 하나님의 피조물이기 때문이다. 십계명은 분명하게 이를 금하고 있다. 결국 죄로 인해서 사람들은 창조주를 피조물로 대체해 버린 것이다.
본문 5절을 보면 ‘말감에게 맹세하는 자들’이 등장한다. 본문의 말감은 무엇을 의미하는가? 먼저는 밀곰이라고 알려진 암몬사람들의 신이라고 보기도 하고(ESV, 왕상 11:5; 33) 이스라엘이 힌놈의 골짜기등에서 아이들을 불살라 바친 신으로 암몬 사람들의 신 몰렉을 가리킨다라고도 한다(NIV, 레 18:21, 렘 5:7). 또한 말감은 멜렉에서 나온 표현으로 '그들의 왕’으로 번역되기도 한다. 어떤 해석도 가능하지만 당시 밀곰이나 몰렉이라는 표현을 사용하지 않고 ‘말감’이라는 단어를 만들어 사용한 것을 보면 세번째 해석이 좋아 보인다. 본문의 왕은 므낫세, 히스기야, 요시야 같은 왕이라기 보다는 하나님보다 높아진 우상들로 그러한 우상들이 우리의 삶의 왕의 자리에 앉았다는 것이다. 하나님께서는 지금 종교적 혼합주의에 대해서 진노하고 계신 것이다.
적극적으로 여호와를 배반하고 따르지 않는 자들도 문제이지만 교회를 분열시키고 문제를 일으키는 대부분의 사람들은 여호와께 맹세하면서 동시에 그들의 왕, 그들의 우상에게 맹세하는 자들이다. 이처럼 믿음에 있어서 양다리는 걸치는 것을 하나님께서 치시는 것이다. 지금 스바냐 선지자는 외적인 우상숭배(바알 숭배자, 이방 제사장, 별 숭배자)에서 내적인 우상숭배(종교적 혼합주의자, 배교자, 실천적 무신론자)에게 관심을 기울이고 있다.
하나님을‘찾다’와‘구하다’는 구분하기가 어려울정도로 비슷한 뜻을지닌 단어들이다. 이 두 단어는종종 함께 사용되며(신14:29;대하20:3-4;시105:3-4; 렘29:13),함께 사용될 경우‘찾다’는일반적으로 하나님의 인도허심을추구한다는 뜻이며 ‘구하다’는 회개를목적으로 하나님을 찾는 것을 의미한다.
한 학자는 성경에서 이 두 단어가 어떻게 시용되는가를 연구한 후 다음과 같은 결론을 내린다: (1)하나님을 찾는 것은 자신이 악한길에서 돌이켜겸손으로 하나님을 경배한다는 뜻이다; (2) 선지자들의 사고에 따르면 하나님을 찾는다는 것은그와 함께 꾸준히 교제하며 그분의 명령에순종하고사랑과정의를 실천하는것이다; (3) 아주많은 제물을 드린다 해도 악한길에서 돌이켜 회개하지 않으면 하나님께로 나아가는 것을 보장받을수 없다;(4)교만한 자와 악인은 아무리 하나님을 찾아도 그분을 만나지 못한다;(5) 구약저지들에 의하면 하나님께서는스스로 결정하고선택하셔서 백성을찾아가자신을 계시하신다. 그러나 진정으로 그분을 찾는 자들은 그분을 만나게 될 것을 소망할 수 있다. 하나님을 찾는다는 것은 그분을 예배한다는 것을 전제하며, 예배행위는 한 번에 끝나는 것이 아니다. 예배는 여호와 앞에 합당한 자세를 취하고, 회개하는 것이며, 하나님을 두려워하는 일이다. 예배는 행위가 아니라 상태이다(a state rather than anact)(Gerleman).이 두 개념은 하나님을 예배한다는 것이 예배자들로부터 의도적인 노력을 요구하고 있음을 강조한다. 하나님을 향한 열정은 일부 모범적인 신앙인들에게서만 드러나는 선택이 아니라 모든 주의 백성들에게 요구되는 필수 사항이다.(엑스포지멘터리 464)
- 1:4The figure of God stretching out his hand against Judah pictured the judgment of God in a powerful way.51It reaches back to the exodus experience where God saved Israel by his outstretched hand or arm (Exod 3:19–20; 4:17; 6:1; 7:19; 13:3; 15:12; cp. 14:31; Deut 4:34; 5:15; 6:21; 7:8, 19; 9:26; 11:2; 26:8; 34:12; Jer 32:21; Ps 136:12). This may be related to an Egyptian motif, the Amarna letters referring to the conquering arm of the Pharaoh.52Isaiah had used the same figure to describe the fury of Assyria which God would bring against Judah: “Yet for all this, his anger is not turned away, his hand is still upraised” (Isa 9:12, 17, 21; 10:4; cp. 5:25; Jer 21:5). The hand symbolized omnipotent power (Jer 32:17) and God’s sovereign direction of history (Isa 14:26–27; Jer 27:5). He moved his hand in judgment against Israel and the nations (Exod 7:5; 1 Sam 5:6, 11; Isa 19:16; 49:22; Jer 6:12; Zech 2:9). The hand stretched against Judah symbolized the power of God brought to bear against the people of Judah and Jerusalem. “Not to see God’s actions is a sign of deep spiritual darkness (Isa 5:12; Ps 28:5).… People are capable of recognizing God’s deeds in creation and in history and are obliged to draw conclusions out of these: to praise, fear, and trust him” (cp. Isa 26:11).53
For the first time Zephaniah began to delineate the kind of sins that aroused the wrath of God against his chosen people. He began “appropriately with an exclusive concentration on the sins committed directly against God in the worship practices of the people.”54These included “religious error (vv. 4b–5), disloyalty (v. 5b), apostasy (v. 6a), and practical atheism (v. 6b).… Six groups are singled out: Baalists, false priests, astral devotees (Zeph 1:4b–5a), syncretists (v. 5b), backsliders (v. 6a), and practical atheists (v. 6b). The first three are actively committed to other gods; the Lord has no place in their religion. The second three pretend a devotion that is actually unreal (v. 5b), have departed from a devotion they once professed (v. 6a), or have reached the ultimate irreligion where the Lord in not a living reality to them at all (v. 6b).”55
“Particularly offensive to Yahweh is syncretism, which in this instance results from mixing the worship of God with that of pagan gods (1:5) and from accepting foreign customs in Judah’s court (1:8). Their worship has become as foreign as their clothing.”56For centuries the people of Israel and Judah had worshiped the Lord while also giving allegiance to the Baal gods. Baalism held a powerful lock on the people of Israel and Judah. When the people entered Canaan from the wilderness of Sinai, the Canaanites remained in the land. The people of Israel learned to farm and to worship Baal from the Canaanites. The Canaanites believed that the Baals ensured the fertility of the land. The Canaanites probably believed that worshiping Baal did as much to produce a crop as breaking the ground, planting the seed, and harvesting the crop.
Still, as Josiah ascended the Judean throne, syncretism and idolatry reigned. “This idolatry infected the very center of Judah’s religious life, the temple, where there were sacred cult objects kept for the worship of the Canaanite goddess Asherah (2 Kgs 23:4; 21:7) and statues dedicated to the sungod[sic] Shamash (2 Kgs 23:11), as well as altars for sacrifice to the Assyrian astral deities (2 Kgs 23:12; 21:4). At these idolatrous shrines, Judean priests led in worship.”57
Baalism involved worship of a variety of gods on the high places. In the temples of Baal “sacred” priestesses served as prostitutes to provide for the fertility of the land.58According to Canaanite belief, Baal was the son of El. As god of fertility and storm, Baal provided the rain and the fertility of the land. Anat was Baal’s consort. “It was believed that if Baal and Anat saw humans cohabiting on earth, they would be reminded of their own conjugal responsibilities. Their cosmic union would then produce on earth bountiful crops and increase the size of flocks and herds.”59No wonder God vowed to stretch out his hand against Judah and Jerusalem and cut off the last trace of Baal worship! “The God who created in health and redeems in wholeness cannot be joined to a god who fertilizes the earth through sacred prostitution and who claims his portion by child sacrifice.”60
Along with the last vestiges of Baalism, God promised to remove two groups mentioned in the last part of the verse—the pagan priests (who served Baal)61and the idolatrous priests (those who served the Lord and also gave allegiance to Baal). To cut off the “names” meant to cause these priests to be forgotten,62much in the same way that Isaiah spoke of giving those eunuchs who kept the Sabbath a “name,” meaning that they would be remembered (Isa 56:4–5). “Instead of providing for the removal of sin, the priesthood instigated depravity of the worst sort.”63The priests and the priesthood of Baal must go! Josiah put into practice Zephaniah’s prophecy by removing the pagan priests (2 Kgs 23; 2 Chr 34).
The reader should not underestimate the abominable allure of Baalism. Baal could be read as a simple common name meaning “owner” (Exod 22:7; Job 31:39), “master” (Isa 1:3), “ruler” (Isa 16:8), or “husband” (Deut 24:4). Worship in the name of Baal could easily be understood as applying the name Baal to refer to Yahweh as owner, master, ruler, husband (cp. Isa 54:5; Jer 31:32; Hos 2:16). The worship of this god corrupted Israel for centuries. Elijah’s contest on Mount Carmel involved the priests of Baal. The purpose for Elijah was to establish whether the Lord or Baal is God. Baalism obviously called into question the very nature of God (1 Kgs 18:21) by diluting the power of God and by giving worship and praise to another. While the word “baal” earlier had been a perfectly good Hebrew title meaning “lord,” “master,” or “husband,” Hosea demanded complete abandonment of the name because of its evil associations (Hos 2:16–17).
Later the people of Israel continued to worship Baal. They assumed that the bounty of nature resulted from him. Gomer, like Israel, had not acknowledged that the Lord “gave her the grain, the new wine and oil … [and] lavished on her the silver and gold—which they used for Baal” (Hos 2:8). “Such lack of concern about God’s standards for proper worship leads to the belief that Yahweh is a powerless deity.”64
51A. S. van der Woude notes that the expression “the hand of God” occurs over two hundred times in the OT (“יָדyād, hand,”TLOT2:501).
52M. Dreytza, “יָד,”NIDOTTE2:403, referring to J. K. Hoffmeier, “The Arm of God Versus the Arm of Pharaoh in the Exodus Narratives,”Bib67 (1986): 378–87. For some reason van der Woude rejects the exodus as giving impetus to the expression in Israel (“יָדyādhand,” 2:501).
53Dreytza, “יָד,” 2:403. God’s hand can also express his protection and his creative power, but those meanings are not associated with the present context.
54Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 262.
55Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:913–14.
56House,Zephaniah, 149.
57Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 64.
58M. J. Mulder, “בַּעַלbaʿal,”TDOT2:192–200.
59C. J. Barber,Habakkuk and Zephaniah, EBC (Chicago: Moody, 1985), 91.
60Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 262–63.
61The Hb. termהַכְּמָרִ֖יםappears also in Hos 10:5 and 2 Kgs 22:5. Patterson says, “In all three cases the term refers to priests outside the established priesthood of Israel and has special connection with Baalism” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 305). P. Jenson (“כֹּמֶר,”NIDOTTE2:662) notes an occurrence in the Jewish Elephantine papyri written after 500 b.c. in which the term refers to Egyptian priests in contrast with Jewish priests (כֹּהֲנִים). Motyer connects it to “one practicing a frenzied or ecstatic religion” (“Zephaniah,” 3:912).
62Patterson points out thatאֶת־שֵׁ֥ם הַכְּמָרִ֖ים עִם־הַכֹּהֲנִֽים“should probably be construed as apposition for emphatic amplification—even the names of the officiating priests connected with Baalism and the other false religions will be cut off” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 305).
63Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 263.
64House,Zephaniah, 149.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 417–420.
- The holy God could not tolerate syncretism—the worship of the Lord and the worship of other gods at the same time. Worship in Zephaniah’s day parallels much of the practice of modern society. Many people are not irreligious; they simply refuse to give allegiance to the Lord God alone. They too lose the guidance and strength of the living Lord, exchanging his blessings for the impotence of pagan worship and daily horoscopes.
The Ammonites, Judah’s neighbors to the east, worshiped Molech, a worship the Israelites shared especially during the reign of Manasseh when some of the people burned their sons and their daughters as an offering to Molech. Josiah’s reform attempted to remove all such practices (2 Kgs 23:10), but these too seemed to persist until the fall of Jerusalem. But the Hebrew text readsmalkām, “their king,” emended to “Molech” by the NIV. It probably is better to translate “their king” here and understand it as referring to a pagan god.69“Zephaniah exposes an expressed loyalty to the Lord, while te the actual basis of life is their king.”70If this interpretation is correct, the “king” would be Baal. Israel swore loyalty “to” (lit. rendering of the Hb. prepositionlĕ) Yahweh but too often swore allegiance “by” (Hb. prepositionbĕ) the name of Baal.71Deuteronomy 6:13; 10:20 limited all oaths in Israel to those done in loyalty to Yahweh and sworn to by his name.
NIV New International Version
69The vocalization of the MT,מַלְכָּֽם, favors the translation “their king.” The KJV and RV took this as a proper noun, “Malcham” or “Malcam.” Other translations use either “Milcom” (RSV, NEB) or “Molech” (NIV), referring to the god of the Ammonites. “Molech” may have derived from the writing of the Hb. consonants with the vowels ofbōšet, meaning “shame.” See the discussion of Patterson, who questions whether the popularity of Molech endured after the days of Solomon (1 Kgs 11:5, 33), being overshadowed by Baalism (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 306). He follows the MT with good reason, understanding “their king” to point to Baal, worshiped in the place of the divine king Yahweh. Watts also reads “their king” but interprets it as a reference to a major Canaanite god known as Athtar in Ugarit, Chemosh in Moab, or Milcom in Ammon. Associated with the planet Venus, he could be one of the astral deities of v. 5 (Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum Habakkuk and Zephaniah, 158). See also E. R. Clendenen, “Religious Background of the Old Testament,” inFoundations for Biblical Interpretation, ed. D. S. Dockery et al. (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 298–99.
70Motyer, “Zephaniah,” 3:913. Watts (Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum Habakkuk and Zephaniah, 157) sees a possible wordplay intended with the wordשׁבע, “swear,” being able to be read also asשׂבע, “be fed by.” Thus Watts reads: “Those who bow down, who are fed by the Lord, but who swear by Milcom. This would picture priests whose support comes from their service in the temple of the Lord but whose genuine commitment is to a foreign deity.”
71See the discussion of Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 264–65.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 420–421.
- 6절) This is the story of many people’s lives. Having started out well in service of God, they have become “weary in well doing” (Gal 6:9). They turned from the active service of the Lord to nothing.
“Seek”(bqš)and “inquire”(drš)frequently appear together (Deut 4:29; 2 Chr 20:3–4; Ps 105:3–4; Jer 29:13) and are difficult at times to differentiate. C. Chhetri understands that “when used together,bqšdenotes seeking in a general sense whiledršdenotes inquiring of God with the view to repentance.74Robertson observes that “the combination of terms underscores the fact that worshiping the true God requires a conscious and directed effort. This intensity in devotion cannot be regarded as an option reserved for a pious minority.”75
To “seek the Lord” normally means to worship him, but such worship is more than a one-time act. It “designates proper behavior before Yahweh, repentance and fear of God. ‘It intends a state rather than an act.’ ”76At Sinai, God led Moses to provide a place where Israel could seek him (Exod 33:7). After Solomon dedicated the temple, God appeared to him and promised forgiveness for a people who sought him and turned from their wicked ways (2 Chr 7:14). To seek in this context involves prayer.77Such seeking is not limited to the temple but can occur even in exile by a people scattered for worshiping false gods (Deut 4:27–31; cp. Jer 29:13). In this case seeking clearly involves repentance, turning from false gods, and turning to the true God in worship at his holy place (Hos 3:5).
Going to the place of worship in and of itself is not truly seeking God (Hos 5:6). It must include ethical obedience (Zeph 2:3). People can seek God because God invites them to in his mercy and forgiveness (Deut 4:31) and has revealed himself to them (Isa 45:19). Ezra promised the protective presence of God to those seeking him (Ezra 8:22). The opposite of seeking in this context is to forsake him. Proverbs connects seeking God to understanding justice (Prov 28:5). “In sum, (1) seeking God requires turning from one’s wicked ways and worshiping him in humility. (2) In prophetic thought, to seek God means to be in constant fellowship with God, to observe his commandments, and to practice love and justice. (3) Sacrifices, no matter how lavish, cannot guarantee access to God for those who do not turn from evil ways and repent. (4) Even though the arrogant and sinful seek God, they never find him. (5) According to the Old Testament writers, ultimately it is God who chooses and seeks the lost to reveal himself to them, but the one who sincerely seeks him can hope to find him.”78
To “inquire” of the Lord means to seek his guidance. The word referred early in Israel’s life to seeking a prophetic word to relieve the distress of a crisis situation (1 Sam 9:9).79This often involved a king seeking a word about national survival from the prophet. The term can be used by an individual in a direct lament to God (Pss 22:27; 34:5; 69:33; 77:3; Job 5:8) or of a person seeking God’s will in a very personal situation (Gen 25:22). Kings inquired of God before battle (2 Chr 18:4–7)80and about situations they did not understand (2 Chr 34:21, 26).81It can also be used for inquiring of and relying on substitute gods, as Jer 8:2 well illustrates.82The word is a technical term for worship. It “became such a comprehensive designation for Yahweh worship that it often stands as the antithesis of idolatry (Isa 65:1, 10; Jer 8:2; Zeph 1:6; Ezra 6:21; 2 Chr 12:14; 14:3; 17:4; 19:3; 22:9; 26:5; 30:19). But, at the same time,drš yhwhbecame synonymous with ‘to fulfill God’s will’ or ‘to keep the commandments’ (1 Chr 22:19; 2 Chr 14:6a; 21:20; likewise Pss 14:2=53:5; 119:1, 10).”83“Thus a loyal, positive, devoted commitment to Yahweh is expressed very generally by the expression ‘seeking Yahweh.’ ”84It becomes closely tied to repentance (Deut 4:29; Ps 78:34; Isa 9:12; Amos 5:4–6; Hos 10:12; Jer 29:13). The Lord contended with people who neither served the Lord nor served other gods. They left behind the service of God. They ignored the Lord, falling prey to a practical atheism that rejected the power of God in their lives. Many people profess belief in God but live as atheists, neither seeking God in worship nor acknowledging him as the Lord of life. God vowed to cut off those who had turned to practical atheism.
The final group, those “who neither seek the Lord nor inquire of him,” could be the most dangerous group of all. They have taken idolatry to its logical conclusion—a complete rejection of God and any acknowledgment in their lives. “Thus Judah had become a ‘backslider’ (v. 6), neglecting the only One who gave her life. God’s reaction to her sin was to condemn her to that death she had chosen.”85
74C. Chhetri, “בקשׁ,”NIDOTTE1:725.
75Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 265–66.
76G. Gerleman, “בקשׁbqš pi.to seek,”TLOT1:253, quoting Westermann,Keryma und Dogma, 5.
77A prayer of intercession can also be involved in “seeking God” (2 Sam 12:16).
78Chhetri, “בקשׁ,” 1:725–26. S. Wagner (“בִּקֵּשׁ,”TWAT1:763–64) points to the common phrase “to seek Yahweh’s face” as belonging to a situation in which a worshiper entered the sanctuary to worship before the statue of the god or goddess. Such understanding was impossible in Israel because such images of the deity were forbidden. Rather, they had to depend on God to be present in the sanctuary as the worshipers came to seek him there. See 2 Sam 21:1; Hos 5:15; Pss 24:6; 27:8.
79See G. Gerleman and E. Ruprecht, “דרשׁdršto inquire after,”TLOT1:347. Cp. 1 Kgs 14:1–18; 22; 2 Kgs 3; 8:7–15.
80Such inquiry did not automatically bring victory or divine help, especially when the king was not in the right relationship with God (Jer 21:2; 37:7–8; Ezek 17:7–8; 20:1, 3).
81Inquiring of God becomes a major theme in Chronicles, being the type of relationship God expects with his people.דרשׁappears twenty-seven times in 2 Chronicles referring to inquiring of God or being related to God. Kings are evaluated on whether they sought after God (2 Chr 12:14; 16:12; 19:3; 22:9; 26:5; 34:3). D. Denninger says, “The essential seeking that Chronicles requires points Israel to the temple in Jerusalem, while specifying a whole-hearted, humble relationship with Yahweh in each individual life” (“דרשׁ,”NIDOTTE1:997). Cf. also J. A. Thompson,1, 2 Chronicles, NAC (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1994), 266, who states that the phrase “defined one who was a member of the believing community” and “stood for one’s whole duty toward God.”
82One can seek the dead for help, but this certainly violates Yahweh’s will (Deut 18:11; Isa 8:19; 19:3; 1 Chr 10:13). One could also inquire of false gods (2 Kgs 1). King Asa found condemnation when he consulted physicians rather than God (2 Chr 16:12). Isaiah (31:1) condemned Judah for depending on Egyptian military aid rather than inquiring of God. Seeking God in false ways while serving other gods brings God’s destroying word (Ezek 14:7–10).
83Gerleman and Ruprech, “דרשׁdrš, to inquire after,” 1:350.
84Wagner, “דָּרַשׁdārash, etc.,”TDOT3:300. Denninger argues that “seeking is a privilege and responsibility of belonging to the covenant community; it is not always cultic” (“דרשׁ,” 1:995).
85Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 65.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 422–424.
스바냐는 유다왕 요시야 시대에 활동하던 선지자로 당시는 앗수르의 힘이 쇠하고 애굽과 유다, 바벨론이 자치권을 되찾는 시기였다. 이 시대 직후에 앗수르를 대신해서 이제 바벨론이 근동의 패권을 차지하게 된다.
스바냐는 여호와의 날이 심판의 날이라는 것을 역설함으로써 주의 백성이 하나님 앞에 의롭게 살아야 한다는 점을 강조한다. 하나님을 경외하지 않고 소외된 자를 톨보지 않는 사람은 지속적인 평안을 누리지 못한다. 여호와의 날이 임하면 그들이 온전하지 못할 것은 물론 오히려 심판을 받게 될 것이기 때문이다. 오래전에 아모스 선지자가 말한 것처럼 주의 백성에게도 여호와의 날은 빛의 날이 아니라 어둠의 날이 될 수 있으며, 위로의 날이 아니라 정좌와 심판의 날이 될 수 있다. 각자의 삶 속에서 공의와 정의를 사랑하시는 하나님의 말씀에 얼마나 잘 순종하며 살았느냐에 의해서 위로의 날 혹은 심판의 날이 결정되는 것이다. 중요한 사실은 여호와의 날이 인류의 종말에 최종적으로 임하지만, 그 이전에 수많은 여호와 날이 부분적으로 혹은 모형으로 우리의 삶에 임할 수 있다는 것이다.
여호와의 날은 고통과 괴로움 속에서 나날을 보내는 사람들에게는 소망의 날이다. 하나님을 의지하기 때문에 이 세%에서 핍박을 받는 자들에게는 더욱 더 그렇다. 현실이 아무리 어렵더라도 역사를 주관하시고, 인류의 종말을 당신의 계획대로 이꿀어 나가실 여호와를 신뢰하면 여호와의 날에 주께서 그들을 위로하시고 축복하실 것이라는 확신이 있기 때문이다. 그러므로 오늘 이 순간 하나님의 섭리에 대하여 이해되지 않는부분이 있다하더라도믿고 기다려야 한다. 불의와 악인들의 만행으로 얼룩진 현실은 성도들에게 지치지 않는 믿음을 요구하는 것이다. 스바냐서는 하나님께서 악을 심판하시는 날과 함께 주의 백성들을 위로하시고 회복하시는 날을 노래함으로써 주의 백성들에게 흔들리지 않는 믿음으로 현실에 임할 것을 권고한다.(엑스포지멘터리 433)
1. 저자
스바냐서의 저자는 ‘스바냐’이다. 이 이름의 의미는 ‘여호와께서 숨기시다, 귀하게 여기시다, 보호하시다’라는 의미를 지닌다. 하나님께서 소중하게 여기시기에 보호하기 위하여 숨기신다는 의미이다. 여호와의 날 온 세상에 하나님의 불같은 심판이 임할 때에 하나님께서는 당신의 사랑하시는 자를 숨기시고 보호하실 것이다.
본문 1:1은 스바냐에 대해서 언급한다.
스바냐 1:1
1아몬의 아들 유다 왕 요시야의 시대에 스바냐에게 임한 여호와의 말씀이라 스바냐는 히스기야의 현손이요 아마랴의 증손이요 그다랴의 손자요 구시의 아들이었더라
본문에서 선지자는 자신을 ‘히스기야의 현손이요 아마랴의 증손이요 그다랴의 손자요 구시의 아들’이라고 밝힌다. 선지자가 자신의 집안 배경을 4대까지 상세하게 밝히는 것은 이례적인 일인데 이는 4대째에 히스기야 왕이 자신의 조상임을 밝히기 위한 것이다. 하지만 본문에서 히스기야를 왕이라고 밝히지 않은 것은 이미 청중들이 선지자가 왕족이라는 것을 알고 있었기 때문이었을 것으로 보인다. 그의 짧은 서신서 내용속에 스바냐는 왕의 삶이 어떤지 알았고(1:8), 상류층, 지도층을 대상으로 메시지를 선포한다(1:8-9; 3:3-4).
스바냐는 왕족 선지자로 어린 요시야에게 영적인 영향력을 행사하여 왕으로 하여금 전심으로 여호와를 따르게 했을 것이다. 또한 스바냐는 미가, 이사야 선지자가 히스기야 왕 시대에 유다와 예루살렘에 대하여 말씀을 선포한 이후 70년만에 다시 유다와 예루살렘을 대상으로 말씀을 선포한 선지자였다.
2. 저작 연대
요시야의 아버지 아몬은 신하들의 반역에 죽임을 당하고 그 국민이 아몬왕을 반역한 이들을 죽이고 요시야를 왕으로 삼았는데 요시야가 왕위에 오를 때 나이가 8세였다.(왕하 21:19-22:2)
남유다에 이러한 반역이 일어난 것으로 보아 정치적으로 매우 불안정한 상황이었던 것으로 보인다. 또한 당시 유다와 예루살렘에는 심각한 우상숭배와 이방인의 풍습이 자리잡고 있었다. 특히 므낫세와 아몬이 적극적으로 앗수르의 풍습을 좇아 우상을 숭배했다. 요시야가 성전에서 발견된 율법 책의 말씀대로 종교개혁을 단행했지만 하나님의 심판을 돌이키기에는 역부족이었다.
약소국의 지배층이 강대국의 풍습과 가치관을 따르는 것은 일반적인 현상이다. 그러므로 이렇게 뿌리내린 이방 종교와 풍습을 타파하는 것은 자칫 종주국에 대한 반역으로 여겨질 수도 있는 일이었다. 그럼에도 요시야가 종교개혁을 단행할 수 있었던 것은 그의 주변에 경건한 이들(스바냐)이 많이 있었기 때문이며 동시에 앗수르가 점차 그 지배력을 잃고 있었기 때문에 가능했던 일이다.
당시 앗수르의 속국으로 있던 애굽이 655년 조공 바치기를 거부했고 이를 지켜보던 유다도 독립을 추구하기 시작했다. 이러한 상황에서 앗수르는 앗수르바니발이 627년에 죽은후 순식간에 몰락하기 시작했다. 바벨론은 625년에 독립을 선언했고 메데군과 합세하여 앗수르 제국의 동쪽을 압박하기 시작했다. 이처럼 순식간에 패권은 앗수르에서 바벨론으로 넘어가게 된다. 하지만 앗수르의 공백을 바벨론이 순식간에 채워버리게 되었다.
- The prophecy takes place during the reign of Josiah (640–609 b.c.), a significant Judean king (2 Kings 21:26–23:20; 2 Chron. 33:25–35:27). The northern kingdom of Israel had already been exiled, in 722 b.c., so “Israel” (Zeph. 2:9; 3:13–15) does not refer to it. Rather, these references speak of the remainder of the nation of Israel: little Judah and its capital, Jerusalem.
Josiah was a reforming king, trying to reestablish acceptable worship practices that had fallen out of use since the time of his great-grandfather Hezekiah (2 Kings 21:1–26). Some suggest that the prophecy comes from the beginning of Josiah’s reign, since the people are still engaging in condemned pagan practices (Zeph. 1:8–9). This is not compelling evidence, however, since even after a religious reform, not all lives are changed. This is clear from the other prophets preaching during this same time (e.g., Jeremiah, Nahum, and Habakkuk), indicating that no matter how clear the call to repentance, there were always those who refused to respond and who need to hear the prophetic word afresh.
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1729.
3. 주제
‘여호와의 날, the day of the LORD’(1:7)이다. 이 날은 하나님을 대적하는 이들에게는 심판을, 하나님을 따르는 이들에게는 복을 가져다준다.
스바냐서는 여호와의 날이라는 주제를 관통하며 1) 하나님의 진노 선포, 2) 세상에 임할 파괴 선언, 3) 다가오는 회복에 대한 신탁으로 이루어진다.
스바냐는 여호와의 날에 대하여 두 가지 차원에서 말씀을 선포한다. 첫째, 선지자는 여호와의 날이 자신의 시대에 임박했음을 의식하고 있었다 (1:7, 14). 이 두려운 날이 임할 때 멸망할 나라로 유다, 블레셋, 모압, 암몬, 구스, 아시리아 등을 구체적인 예로 들고 있다. 그런데 이날이 다름 아닌 바빌론의 가나안 침략과 근동지역의 평정으로 성취되었던 것이다(Chisholm). 둘째, 스바냐가 선포하는 여호와의 날에 임할 파괴는 그 규모가 범우주적이며, 이스라엘뿐만 아니라 열방의 구원도 동반한다는 점에서 그의 시대를 지나 먼 훗날에 성취될 것이라는 점을 암시하고 었다. 즉, 선지자가 여호와의 날의 임박함과 이날의 범우주적인 파장을 하나의 통일성 있는 그림으로 묶고 있지만, 실제로는 임박한 일과 먼 훗날에 있을 일을 적절하게 조화시켜 놓은 것에 불과하다.
그렇다면 스바냐가 선포하는 여호와의 날의 최종 목표는 무엇인가? 하나님께서 무엇을 이루시기 위하여 범세계적인 심판을 진행하시는가? 무엇보다도 자신의 백성을 포함한 세상 만민들이 하나님의 은혜에 의하여 회복되어 여호와께 참예배를 드리게 하기 위함이다. 이러한 사실은 여호와의 날이 주의 백성들에게는 위로의 날이지만, 열방에게는 심판의 날일 뿐이라고 생각하는 자들에게는 신선한 도전이 될 것이다. 스바냐는 그날이 오면 여호와의 심판이 열방뿐만 아니라 이스라엘에도 임할 것이며, 회복 역시 이스라엘에게만 임히는 것이 아니라 온 열방에게 임할 것을 명백히 하고 있다.(엑스포지멘터리 442)
4. 목적, 계기, 배경
한 세대나두세대 전에 형제 나라인 이스라엘의멸망과 국외 추방을보았음에도불구하고유다는한민족으로서하나님을향한언약적 의무로 되돌아오기를거부한다. 경건한 요시야의 통치는이러한 변화를 이룰 이상적인기회를 제공하며 하나님은스바냐를 통해유다 앞에, 그리고 실로다른 모든 나라 앞에놓여있는 결정을, 그결정의 결과와더불어분명히제시하기를 원하신다. 하나님은 유다가 이미 죄악에 물든 것이 드러났으므로 유다에 대한 형벌을요구하신다.만일 유다가 회개하고그악을 버리면‘혹시’하나님이 용서하실지도모른다 (2:3).
이책은 여러 나라를 배경으로하고 있는데그가운데많은 나라가 하나님의 백성 이스라엘에 대한 대적을 통해하나님을 대적했다.“블레셋"(2 :4~7) 은가나안 정복시대 이후로 같은 땅을 놓고 이스라엘과 경쟁해온반면(예컨대출13:17;수13:2)이스라엘 백성의 먼 친척(창 19:36~38) 인 “모압”과“암몬”(습 2:8~11) 은 가나안 정복이전에 이스라엘이 자신들의 땅을 통과하는것에반대했다(민2~24장).“구스”(습 2:12) 는 아마도 애굽의25( 에티오피아) 왕조를가리킬 것이며(사18장을 보라), “앗수르"(습 2:13~15)는이 예언의 시대에 유다를 지배하던 외국 세력이다.놀랍게도경고를 받는나라들중마지막 나라는 하나님의또 다른 원수인 유다의수도인 ‘예루살렘’으로 상징된다 (3:1~7).이로써 하나님의 진노의 메시지는 하나님의친백성임을자처하는 이들의 면전에 제시된다.
5. 핵심 주제
1) 하나님은 온땅(1: 2~3, 17~18, 3:8) 과유다(1: 4~16, 3:1~7) 와유다의 이웃 이방 나라들 (2:4~8) 을 똑같이심판하실 것이다.
4) 심판과 복은가까운 미래에선지자와선지자의청중에게발생하며 또한 먼 미래에도 발생한다 (3:8~9,11,13~17)
5) 2세대하나님의 자녀같은 것은존재하지 않는다. 모든 세대는앞세대의 믿음에 의존하지 말고 하나님의언약을 인정해야 한다.
6. 다른 책들과의 관계와 문예적 특징
스바냐서는 12권의 소선지서중에 9번째 책으로 바벨론의 출현과 유다 정복을 예언하는 하박국서를 뒤따르는 책이다. 또한 주전 586년 바벨론의 손에 무너진 예루살렘 성전 재건과 다윗 왕조의 회복 가능성을 시사하는 학개서 바로 앞에 등장하는 책이기도 하다.
스바냐서를 앞서는 하박국서는 바벨론의 출현과 그들에 의한 예루살렘 파괴를 논하고 스바냐서를 뒤따르는 학개서는 바벨론 군에 의하여 폐허가 되어버린 예루살렘과 성전을 재건히는 것을 염두에 두고 쓰여진 책이다. 이점에 근거하여 스바냐서가 묘사하고 있는 여호와의 날의 심판을 바벨론 사람들이 예루살렘과 성전을 파괴하고 유다 백성을 포로로 잡혀간 일로 해석하기도 한다. 하지만 스바냐서의 여호와의 날은 이처럼 임박한 심판을 의미하면서 동시에 먼 미래에 임할 하나님의 심판을 전하고 있다.
스바냐서는 전형적인예언서지만독특한 특정들이함께뒤섞여 있다.이선지서내의일차적인 장르는 심판 신탁이며 구원 신탁은예상되는곳, 즉맨끝에 등장한다. 스바냐서는이른바‘소선지서’ 가운데 거의유일무이하게 축소판‘대선지서’처럼 보인다.스바냐서에는 심판 신탁(1:1~18), 이방에 대한신탁(2:4~15), 소망의 신탁 (3:8~20)이있고 (암2:4이후의아모스서와매우 비슷하게 관심사가나라밖에서 나라 안으로바뀌는) 2 :1~3과3:1~7은예루살렘에 예리하게적용되는 ‘전환적’ 신탁의 역할을 한다.
스바냐서의문예적 의도는 다음과 같다. 즉, 다가오는 여호와의 날이라는 모티프를 통해 죄에대한하나님의 심판을 묘사하는 것, 다가올 심판을 그림처럼 생생하게 묘사하는 데 시라는 방편을 사용하는 것, 회개를 불러일으킬 목적으로다가올심판에대한두려움을 불러일으키는 것, 하나님의 복의 가능성을 하나님의 은총의 회복에대한마지막 신탁의 형태로 표현하는 것, 지위와 재물이 있는이들을고발하는 동시에 (1:8~9, 12, 18,3:3~4)백성들과동질감을 느끼고 가난한 이들에대해관심을 보이는 것이다(특히 습2:3.이둘은 3:11~13에 압축되어 있다).
7. 개요
Outline
I.Heading (1:1)
II.Judgment Coming Against Judah (1:2–6)
III.The Day of the Lord (1:7–3:20)
A.Day of sacrifice and punishment (1:7–9)
B.The coming wrath (1:10–18)
1. Against God’s people (1:10–16)
2. Against all humanity (1:17–18)
C. Repentance is still possible (2:1–3)
D. Nations warned (2:4–3:8)
1. Philistines (2:4–7)
2. Moab and Ammon (2:8–11)
3. Cush (2:12)
4. Assyria (2:13–15)
5. Jerusalem (3:1–7)
6. Summary (3:8)
E.Anticipation of hope (3:9–20)
1. Conversion of the nations (3:9–10)
2. Judah’s return (3:11–13)
3. Joyful song (3:14–17)
4. God’s promised restoration (3:18–20)
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1731.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 나 3:14–19.
14너는 물을 길어 에워싸일 것을 대비하며 너의 산성들을 견고하게 하며 진흙에 들어가서 흙을 밟아 벽돌 가마를 수리하라
15거기서 불이 너를 삼키며 칼이 너를 베기를 느치가 먹는 것 같이 하리라 네가 느치 같이 스스로 많게 할지어다 네가 메뚜기 같이 스스로 많게 할지어다
16네가 네 상인을 하늘의 별보다 많게 하였으나 느치가 날개를 펴서 날아감과 같고
17네 방백은 메뚜기 같고 너의 장수들은 큰 메뚜기 떼가 추운 날에는 울타리에 깃들였다가 해가 뜨면 날아감과 같으니 그 있는 곳을 알 수 없도다
18앗수르 왕이여 네 목자가 자고 네 귀족은 누워 쉬며 네 백성은 산들에 흩어지나 그들을 모을 사람이 없도다
19네 상처는 고칠 수 없고 네 부상은 중하도다 네 소식을 듣는 자가 다 너를 보고 손뼉을 치나니 이는 그들이 항상 네게 행패를 당하였음이 아니더냐 하시니라
The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 나 3:14–19.
나훔은 앗수르에게 조롱섞인 어조로 자신을 방어할 수 있으면 방어해보라고 이야기하고 있다.(14-17절) 그리고 이어서 앗수르 왕을 비웃으며 너희가 행한 행위대로 당할 것이라고 말하며 자신의 예언을 마친다.
14절) 선지자는 니느웨를 향해서 다가오는 적의 공격에 대비할 것을 요청한다. 이를 위해서 적들의 포위를 대비해서 물을 길어 둘 것을 요청한다. 이는 강물로 둘러싸인 니느웨에 ‘물을 길어두라’는 말은 조롱으로 들린다. 실제로 고대의 전쟁에서는 성을 포위하여 고립시킨 후에 그곳에 식량과 물의 공급을 막아서 자멸할 때까지 기다리는 전술을 많이 사용했다. 앞서 2:6을 보면 적들이 강의 수문을 닫음으로 물의 공급을 제한하거나, 수문을 열어서 수공을 할 수도 있기에 이에 대비한 수로체계을 마련하여 성 안에 물을 마련해 둘 것을 말하는 것이다. 또한 성을 견고하게 할 것을 요청하는데 이를 위해서 진흙으로 들어가 모르타르를 밟아서 찍어낸 벽돌을 만들라고 말한다. 이렇게 벽돌을 만드는 공정을 수리하는 이유는 여기서 만든 벽돌을 통해서 산성을, 요새를, 성벽을 견고하게 하기 위함이다.
나훔이 이야기하고자 하는 바는 앗수르가 물을 긷고 성벽을 보수함으로 최선을 다해서 자신들을 공격하는 대적들의 침략을 대비하지만 결코 성벽을 방어하는데는 실패할 것임을 말하는 것이다.
15절) 앞서 적의 공격을 막기위해서 열심히 준비한다고 할지라도 불이 니느웨를 삼키며 칼이 나와 그들을 칠 것이다.(2:13) 실제로 고고학자들은 니느웨에서 파괴적인 화재의 증거들을 발견했다. 느치(메뚜기)가 휩쓸고 지나가면 곡창과 전원지대는 쑥대밭이 되고 만다. 그렇게 대량 학살과 약탈을 당하는 상황가운데 스스로 느치와 같이, 메뚜기와 같이 많게 하라는 것은 그들을 향한 비꼬는 표현이다.
- Nahum and other prophets used fire as a symbol of defeat and destruction of any kind (Amos 1–2). The prophet used the verb “to eat” with the fire, as if the flames would “lick” the people. The sword and fire both represented the instruments of warfare generally and indicated the coming destruction for Nineveh. After the capture of a city, the enemy often burned it, possibly as punishment for its resisting capture. The resulting charred remains continue to aid archaeological research by helping to date the destruction of the cities.
A literal translation of the third line reads, “It will consume you like the locust” (Nah 3:15). Several problems come from this translation. (1) To what does “it” refer? The nearest noun is the “sword,” but the “fire” seems to be most natural. The sword could not be used to destroy the locust, but farmers often used fire to rid themselves of the locust. (2) Does “like the locust” refer to the fire or sword consuming or to the way the locust consumes crops?92(3) Four different Hebrew words for “locust” occur in Nah 3:15–17. What did Nahum intend to convey by these words? The first word in the text, translated “grasshoppers” in the NIV, probably refers to the young locust, which has a more voracious and destructive appetite than the mature locust. Nahum’s meaning then would be that like the destructive young locust, the attackers of Nineveh would consume the populace of Nineveh.93
The second word for “locust” is translated “locust” in the NIV and apparently refers to the mature locust. The remaining two words (in v. 17) indicate swarms of locusts. The use of swarms probably indicates the large number of Assyrian officials.94“The devouring of an entire metropolitan area by a small creature like the locust underscores the futility of man’s grandiose plans. The most obscure and seemingly defenseless of God’s creatures brings to their knees the most powerful of God’s adversaries.”95
The last two lines of v. 15 begin a new section that describes the leading men of Nineveh in terms of the locusts. The words are filled with irony. Nahum commanded (an imperative) the people to multiply as the young locust and to multiply as the mature locust. Nineveh had multiplied its merchants at the expense of the nations. Now those merchants would not save the nation. As locusts on a sunny day, they would fly away.
92Taking these problems into account, Clark and Hatton (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 56) provide four possible meanings for the phrase:
1.The sword will devour you as it devours the locust;
2.The sword will devour you as the locust devours the crops;
3.The fire will devour you as it devours the locust;
4.The fire will devour you as the locust devours crops.
Clark and Hatton, as well as the translators of the NIV, take the second alternative as being the most likely since the antecedent to “it” is the nearest noun “sword,” and the sword could not be used to remove locusts. This leaves the second suggestion as the only reasonable alternative. Other translations remove the line completely as being a duplication of material found later in vv. 15–16 (see BHS). Maier translates: “It [the fire] shall devour thee as it [the fire] devours the locust,” arguing that “here neither ‘the sword’ nor ‘the locust’ is the subject, but ‘the fire.’ The fact that the verbתֹּאכְלֵ֣ךְhas been used at the beginning of this verse with fire speaks for its association here with the same verb” (The Book of Nahum, 346).
NIV New International Version
93The word for “locust” or “grasshopper” (יָּלֶק) means “to strip off the skin,” an apparent reference to the young locust, which sheds its skin and then has usable wings. See J. A. Thompson,BT(1974): 25:405–11.
NIV New International Version
94Maier wants to interpret the passage so that every reference to locusts in 3:15–17 refers to Nineveh (The Book of Nahum, 346).
95Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 124.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 238–240.
16-17절) 니느웨가 번성한 시기에는 하늘의 별처럼 많은 상인들이 이 광대한 제국에 엄청난 부를 가져다 주었다. 하지만 포위 공격을 당하는 이 시점에 이들의 부는 어떤 도움도 되지 않는다. 적들은 느치와 같이 이곳을 휩쓸고 지나갈 것이고, 니느웨의 방백들과 장수들은 메뚜기 떼와 같이 추운 날에는 울타리에 깃들여 있다가 해가 뜨면 날아가 사라지는 것같이 그 있는 곳을 알 수 없게 된다.
일이 잘될 때는 주변에서 이익을 얻기 위해서 사람들이 모인다. 그리고 충성은 다짐하기도 한다. 하지만 난관에 봉착하면 이런 형태로 이익을 추구하는 목적을 위해서 모인이들은 순식간에 자리를 박차고 도망가게 된다. 니느웨에서 거래를 하면서 부를 축적하던 이들이 니느웨가 공격을 받아 도움이 필요할 때 모두 등을 돌리며 떠나게 된다는 것이다. 결국 이런 자기중심성을 극복하는 관계, 공동체를 우리는 가졌는가?
본문속애서 메뚜기, 느치가 반복적으로 사용된다. 이는 막을 수 없는 엄청난 군대로 휩쓸고 지나가면 아무것도 남지 않는 것을 보여줌과 동시에 이것이 해가 뜨면 날아가서 어디로 가는지 알 수 없게 되는 것처럼 앗수르의 방백들과 장수들의 약함과 충성되지 않음을 비유하고 있다.
- 3:17The twin themes of hopelessness and locusts continue in v. 17. As in the preceding verse, those people most likely to defend the city would depart like the locust. The words for “guards” and “officials” are Assyrian loan words that Nahum used to heighten the effect. Though the words are difficult to translate, the idea of guards and officials indicates the nature of those fleeing the city like locusts. “Their leaders may be vast in numbers, but they are inept, ineffective, and essentially looking after their own interests.”98How could Nineveh stand if those with the most to lose deserted the city? How could Nineveh stand with leaders they cannot trust? This theme of false trust permeates prophetic literature. Usually, such condemnation attacks Israel and its failure to trust God. Nahum shows it can be used “against any who dared to make claims concerning their own power.”99
Cold weather affected the locust. On cold days the locusts barely moved, preferring to hide in the crevices provided by stone fences that surrounded the fields of Assyria. When the weather warmed, the locusts began to move again and flew away. Who knows where locusts fly? Can you keep up with a swarm of locusts? If you can find the locusts who fly away, you can also find the leading officials of Nineveh on the day of attack. Longman shows how Nahum has satirically taken a common image using locusts to describe “unstoppable armies” and used it instead to describe armies and nations characterized by weakness and disloyalty.100
“The Assyrians had based their empire on expediency and self-interest, multiplying power, wealth, and personnel like locusts for their own gratification. Now their empire was to succumb as a victim of the self-interest it had promoted—eaten away from within no less than it was devoured by the sword from without.”101
98Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 126.
99Coggins and Re’emi,Israel among the Nations, 57.
100Longman, “Nahum,” 826.
101Armerding, “Habakkuk,” 7:488–89.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 240–241.
18-19절) 앗수르의 목자들은 잠들었고 귀족들은 누워서 쉬고 있고 백성들은 산들에 흩어지지만 그들을 다시 모을 자가 없다. 또한 앗수르 왕국이 당한 상처는 고칠 수 없고 그 부상은 위중하다. 이처럼 공격을 받아 백성들이 흩어지는데 지도자들은 사망의 잠을 자고 있는 것이다. 이러한 앗수르의 패망의 소식을 듣는 자들은 손뼉을 치며 기뻐하는데 이는 앗수르가 이전에 그들에게 행패를 행했기 때문이다. 사람들은 앗수르가 강성할 때는 그들의 비위를 맞추기 위해서 그들과 함께하며 그들의 편인 것 처럼 행동했지만 이제 앗수르가 비참한 종말을 맞이하는 순간 그들곁에 함께 있어주는 자들은 없었고 도리어 손뼉을 치며 기뻐하고 있는 것이다. 나훔은 앗수르 왕국과 니느웨가 이전에 고대 근동의 다른 민족들에게 잔인한 포악을 행한 대로 그들이 당할 것임을 말하고 있는 것이다.
앗수르의 목자들은 잠 자고 있다. 백성들은 흩어진다. 하지만 우리의 목자되신 주님은 자신의 양들을 지키기 위해서 자신의 생명을 바치시는 분이다. 한마리 잃은 양을 찾아 헤매이시는 분이시다.(요 10:11)
나훔서는 우리의 지난 삶을 돌아보게 하는 책이다. 우리는 얼마나 의롭게 살아왔으며, 세상 사람들과 어떤 관계를 형성하며 살아왔는가? 만일 내가 오늘 죽는다면, 이 소식을 듣고 슬퍼활 사람들은 몇이나 되며, 오히려 기뻐할 사람들은 또 몇이나 될까? 노벨이 각 분야에 상을 수여하게 된 동기에 이런 일화가 있다. 그는 다이너마이트를 발명하여 많은 돈을 벌었다. 그러나 그 다이너마이트가 전쟁에서 살상용으로 사용되는 것에 대하여는 이렇다 할 대책이 없다고 생각했고 또한 그것이 자신의 책임도 아니라고 생각했다. 그러던 어느 날 조간신문을 받아 든 그는 깜짝놀랐다. 신문사의 기자가 잘못 알고 마치 노벨이 전날 죽은 것처럼 기사를 써서 1면에 대서특필로 기재한 것이었다. 기사의 타이틀은 ‘죽음의 상인 노벨이 죽다’로 되어 있었으며, 노벨의 업적보다는 부정적인 면에 초점을 맞춘 글이었다. 노벨은 심한 충격을 받았고 그 이후로 많은 생각을 하다가 결국에는 자신이 죽으면 전 재산을 털어 인류의 발전과 평화를 위하여 노력하는 사람들에게 상으로 줄 것을 유언을 남겼던 것이다.
나훔은 마치 영존할 것 같던 악의 성, 육신으로 상징되는 아시리아의 멸망을 선포하고 있다. 혹시 우리는 아시리아와 같은 모습으로 남을 괴롭히고 있지는 않은가? 혹시 우리는아시리아가 마치 영원한 권세를 누릴 것 같이 착각한 것처럼 동일한 착각을 하고 있지는 않은가? 하나님의 메시지는 분명하다. 아시리아가 멸망한 것처럼 세상의 악이 심판받을날이 반드시 임할 것이다.(엑스포지멘터리 333)
- “Everyone who hears the news about you” included all the smaller states of Western Asia. All would rejoice in Nineveh’s demise because all had come under Nineveh’s endless cruelty.110God’s judgment of Nineveh aided Judah and the other weaker nations suffering under the barbaric regime of the king of Assyria. Assyria had stolen, plundered, and committed acts of unconscionable atrocity. God acted in history to remove the oppressor and to restore the oppressed. Thus God’s final message to Nineveh’s king was brutal: “Three continents have reeled for decades from the irrational extremes of your passion. Shall those whose eyes you have gouged out shed tears at your death? Shall those whose ears and nose you have cut off lament now? Shall the tongues you have chopped off recite your praises?” No, the time had come in which “the offer of mercy must be superseded by divine judgment.”111
In this context we find the true point of Nahum. God is the Lord of history who works in history to correct oppression and to lift up the oppressed. “Nineveh is no ordinary city for the prophet, nor is Assyria just another degenerating civilization. They stand for the ultimate supernatural evil that frustrates and suppresses the purposes and people of God. Their defeat is a sign of the victory of God and the basis for hope that his power and justice will ultimately conquer all evil.”112
Those who read the Book of Nahum should not miss the point that God cares for the weak and needy of the world and is working in history to correct oppression. Let us make sure that we recognize God’s work and seek to correct oppression and participate in the work of God in his world. For us who read the Book of Nahum today, a strong message comes through. We can easily stand with Nahum and point the finger of guilt at our enemies. We quickly volunteer for God’s army, hardly able to wait for his call to battle against the hated enemy. God calls us to another listening post as we read Nahum. He calls us to stand with the court of the king of Nineveh and listen to God’s description of who we are in his sight. He calls us to take off our battle uniforms and watch God at work. “We must never forget that the whole Book of Nahum is a celebration of divine, not human, action. Nahum leaves vengeance in the hands of God.”113So must we. When we listen to Nahum from this vantage point, something entirely unexpected happens. The hymn of hate is directed against us. We stand in the tension between the God who is full of wrath and yet good and slow to anger. We come to see that God is calling us to bear our cross, yes even to Calvary and death. We are not only “to resist evil, not only to correct it, but also sometimes simply to suffer it, confident in the assurance that God will finally cleanse his earth of all corruption.”114Then for us Nahum becomes more than anything else a great call to repentance.
110Baker notes that “rejoicing is not in this context gleeful gloating at the misfortune of others (cf. Ps 22:17; Obad 12; Rev 11:10), an attitude which is unacceptable for the people of God. Rather, it is pleasure at the vindication of God and his promises” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 23b, 40).
111Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 130–31.
112Watts, “Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah,” 120.
113Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 29.
114Ibid.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 242–243.
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 나 3:8–13.
8◎네가 어찌 노아몬보다 낫겠느냐 그는 강들 사이에 있으므로 물이 둘렸으니 바다가 성루가 되었고 바다가 방어벽이 되었으며
9구스와 애굽은 그의 힘이 강하여 끝이 없었고 붓과 루빔이 그를 돕는 자가 되었으나
10그가 포로가 되어 사로잡혀 갔고 그의 어린 아이들은 길 모퉁이 모퉁이에 메어침을 당하여 부서졌으며 그의 존귀한 자들은 제비 뽑혀 나뉘었고 그의 모든 권세자들은 사슬에 결박되었나니
11너도 술에 취하여 숨으리라 너도 원수들 때문에 피난처를 찾으리라
12네 모든 산성은 무화과나무의 처음 익은 열매가 흔들기만 하면 먹는 자의 입에 떨어짐과 같으리라
13네 가운데1)장정들은 여인 같고 네 땅의 성문들은 네 원수 앞에 넓게 열리고 빗장들은 불에 타도다
1)히, 백성
The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 나 3:8–13.
8절) 본문에서 나훔 선지자는 앗수르(니느웨)를 노아몬과 비교한다. 노아몬은 테베(Thebes)로 이집트의 위대한 도시로 1400여년 동안 세상에 강력한 영향력을 행사하던 난공불락의 도시였다. 테베는 니느웨와 같이 강 사이에 위치한 도시로 하르는 물줄기로 천연 요새를 삼아 오랫동안 번영하던 도시였다. 이곳은 지중해로부터 남쪽으로 650km떨어진 도시로 나일강의 동쪽 둑에 위치했다. 나일강은 마치 바다와 같이 광대한 넓이로 테베를 둘러싸고 있었다. 실제로 나일강의 폭이 800m나 되었기에 이 강이 성벽과 방어벽이 되었어 수성에 용이한 도시였다. 테베는 남서쪽으로는 사막으로 둘러싸여 있었고 동쪽으로 나아가면 홍해가 펼쳐져 있었다. 이 도시가 앗수르에게 663년에 정복된 일은 매우 불가사이한 일이었다. 선지자는 이렇게 막강해 보이던 도시 테베(노아몬)이 무너졌다면 상대적으로 별볼일 없어 보이는 니느웨가 멸망되는 것은 당연한 일이 아닌가라고 말하고 있는 것이다.
‘노아몬’을 히브리어의 음역으로 그 의미는 ‘아몬 신의 보호아래 있는 도시’라는 의미이다.
- 3:8Are you better than Thebes …?Nineveh was not better fortified and did not appear more invincible than Thebes, a very important, powerful city located in southern Egypt (about 400 miles/644 km from the Mediterranean).Nile … water around her. This mighty river, along with canals and channels from the Nile that surrounded most of Thebes, was an aspect of the city’s strong defense system and its seeming invulnerability.Rampart a seais a poetic reference to the Nile (cf. Isa. 19:5), which was about half a mile wide at Thebes. The Nile, canals, and channels formed a natural outerwallfor the city. Nineveh did not have similar protection.
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1717.
- 3:8“The point of this taunt song is not to compare the relative strengths of the Assyrian and Egyptian empires, but to announce that human might is as nothing before the wrath of God.”48People who thought of the power of Nineveh in legendary ways had difficulty understanding that Assyria could crumble. After all, those who heard Nahum’s message had only known of one power in the world—Assyria. From the time of Tiglath-pileser in 745 b.c., Assyria exerted influence over the ancient Near East. As a result, other people of the world thought of Assyria in epic proportions and assumed that no one could defeat the Assyrian power.
Assyria’s drive deep into Egypt to conquer Thebes proved to be one of the military wonders of the ancient world. Egypt relied on its geography to protect itself. Protected by deserts to the south and west and the Nile and the Red Sea to the east and the Mediterranean Sea to the north, Egypt seemed impenetrable.49Only the marshy area in the land of Goshen where the Suez Canal now lies gave Egypt any sense of vulnerability. During the time preceding the exodus of the people of Israel from Egypt, the pharaoh worried about the large number of slaves in that area of Egypt and what would happen should an invader convert these slaves to help raid Egypt. This formed part of the background for the pharaoh’s attempt to limit the Hebrew population by killing male children born to the Hebrews (Exod 2).
Because of its location and fortifications, Nineveh thought of itself as similarly protected from invaders. A series of canals protected Nineveh from outside attack. The Nile, a half-mile wide at Thebes, protected this capital of Egypt. Thebes, the Greek name for the city, lay on the east bank of the Nile about four hundred miles (650 km) south of Cairo. In the Hebrew text the name for the city is No-Amon, meaning “the city under the care of the god Amon.”50The ruins of Luxor and Karnak testify of the greatness of the city, often called the greatest city of the ancient world.51
When Nahum spoke of the water surrounding the city, he probably wanted to convey the similarities between Thebes and Nineveh. Both cities were situated by great rivers of the world, and both derived from those rivers protection as well as secure sources of water during attack. Although as far as we know Thebes did not have the system of canals that Nineveh used for its protection, the cities were similar in their dependence on water.
For Thebes, like Nineveh, “the river was her defense, the waters her wall.”52The words for “defense” and “wall” both refer to fortifications of a city. “Defense” conveys the idea of protection against the enemy, but the word misses the significance of the Hebrew term, which refers to a “rampart” or an outer wall of fortification as found in 2 Sam 20:15. The Hebrews often called the rampart a “son of a wall,” meaning a smaller wall than the main defensive area of the city. “At Thebes, Nahum declares, the first defense before the walls of the city was ‘the sea.’ ”53
The context shows Nahum’s point. “He does not stress moral or political superiority but the advantages of strategic location.”54Nahum intended to convey the idea that Nineveh, like Thebes, depended on the waters as both the outer fortification and the main defense. After all, what could be a better defense than a half-mile wide river? Who could hope to penetrate such a natural barrier? Yet Assyrian force accomplished just such a mission.55Nahum made his point quite clear. If Thebes could fall, Nineveh could be overrun as well.
Nahum wanted to show that Nineveh could be defeated. Was Nineveh any better than Thebes? Thebes “was the first great city of the Orient, and it remained one of the world’s leading cities for over fourteen hundred years.”56Thebes, too, appeared invincible. Both cities depended on water for protection, and both survived for centuries. Nahum asserted that as Thebes fell so also Nineveh would fall. He addressed the people of Nineveh by asking the rhetorical question, “Are you better than No-Amon?” Of course not! As No-Amon (Thebes) fell to Assyria in 663 b.c., so Nineveh would also fall. Reputation, intimidation, and fortifications could not stand before the mighty God.
48Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 26.
49Robertson describes the situation: “The wall of water that surrounded Thebes provided a year-round buffer difficult for any invader to overcome (v. 8). The coterie of kindred nations that encompassed the capital city of Thebes added military and political difficulties for any potential enemy (v. 9)” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 112). R. J. Coggins and S. P. Re’emi warn against searching Nahum’s descriptions for absolutely accurate details of geography and history. “Themes which cannot be accurate historically or geographically are juxtaposed for literary effect. Thus the expression ‘her rampart a sea’ cannot be taken literally, for Thebes is almost 645 km (400 mi.) from the nearest sea, but it summons up the idea of Yam, the primordial sea whose power is overthrown by Yahweh” (Israel among the Nations, ITC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985], 52). On the other side Maier argues: “It should be evident from Nahum’s presentation, however, that he was well informed regarding the major factors in No-Amon’s situation. His words contain nothing fantastic” (The Book of Nahum, 316–17).
50The name “populous No” of the KJV comes from the identification by Jerome. Thebes is often called No (נֹא) from the Egyptian word “city” (Jer 46:25; Ezek 30:14–16). Jerome apparently used a rabbinic interpretation for his usage of the name. Jerome, in fact, later identified No with Alexandria, a clear misidentification. No-Amon or Thebes serves the translator better for its accuracy. Note R. L. Smith (Micah–Malachi, 87–88) for further discussion of the use of the name.
51Clark and Hatton,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 49.
52J. D. W. Watts claims that “the elaborate references tostreamsandwaterseem to go beyond a factual description of the city’s position. The Egyptians thought of Thebes as a sacred city, built on the first dry land to emerge from the primeval waters. They considered the river Nile to be the supreme manifestation of creation’s blessings, and based their faith and security on its powers. Nahum sees it, rather, as a symbol of their arrogant and heathen attitude against the Lord” (“The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah,” inThe Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible[Cambridge: University Press, 1975], 118–19).
53Maier,The Book of Nahum, 317.
54Ibid., 314. See his comparison between Thebes and Nineveh (p. 319).
55Nahum described the rampart as a “sea” (יַם). Of course, the Nile was not a sea in the technical sense, just as the Sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea are anot really seas. But in its significance the Nile served as the “sea” and outer defense for Thebes. No one should think that it could be overcome. The last phrase of Nah 3:8 (מִיָּ֖ם חוֹמָתָֽהּ) literally reads “from a sea her wall,” which seems to take away the smoothness of the message as well as the parallelism of the verse. The NIV thus follows the versions in reading “waters.” In an unpointed Hebrew text (the way Hebrew was written in ancient times) the word could be read as either “sea” or “waters.” The NIV agrees with many other translations in changing the pointing of the text.
56Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 25.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 229–231.
9-10절) 노아몬은 구스와 애굽, 붓과 루빔의 도움을 얻을 수 있었지만 그것이 그들에게 도움이 되지 않았다. 결국 노아몬은 지리적인 요충지였고 주위에 도울 나라들이 많이 있었음에도 자신들을 지킬 수가 없었고 그래서 포로로 잡혀 갔다. 그의 어린 아이들은 길 모퉁이에 메어침을 당하여 죽임을 당했고 존귀한 자들, 귀족들은 제비 뽑혀 나뉘어 졌고 권세자들은 사슬에 결박되었다.
노아몬이 앗수르에게 공격을 당해 점령당하고 그 주민들이 살육당하고 포로로 끌려갔다. 침략자인 앗수르는 매우 잔인하게 포로들을 다루었다. 주민들을 노예로 잡아가고, 어린아이들을 벽에 던져 죽게했다. 그리고 자신들에게 도움이 될 것으로 여겨지는 존귀한 자들은 제비를 뽑아 그들의 노예로 삼았다.
구스는 애굽의 남쪽에 있던 에디오피아를 말하는 것으로 보인다.
- 3:10Nahum’s point was that if Thebes, with all its defenses, could fall, how could Nineveh consider itself impregnable? As surely as Thebes fell to Assyria, Nineveh would fall at the judgment of the great God. Though well-positioned with natural defenses and allied with its immediate neighbors, Thebes went into captivity. The same would happen to Nineveh. Nineveh knew the example well. Its armies, under the ultimate command of Ashurbanipal the king, took Thebes in 663 b.c. The policies of exile, slave trading, and slaughter of infants were the ruthless policies of Nineveh as carried out by the most efficient and barbaric army of the time.
Assyria practiced a cruel system of exile for captured nations. Samaria serves as the prime example. When Samaria fell to Assyria under Tiglath-pileser III in 722 b.c., Assyria carried off many of the citizens of the Northern Kingdom to distant nations. Many of the citizens of those and other nations suffered exile to Samaria. The Old Testament indicates that the Samaritans, with their distinctive theological views and enmity with the people of Judea, came from the exile imposed by the Assyrians (2 Kgs 17:1–41).
Four events occurred even though Thebes benefited from its superior geographical defenses and its military alliances. First, the people of Thebes were taken captive and went into exile.
Second, the attackers cruelly destroyed even the infants of Thebes. The picture of dashing in pieces conveys the most barbaric treatment imaginable. The invaders crushed the infants against the stones and buildings of the city. Such cruelty abounded in ancient times. At a later time the psalmist declared the joy of the one who could dash the heads of the infants of Babylon against the rock (Ps 137:9). The whole point of Nahum’s message was that Nineveh would suffer the same fate as the people of Thebes. “At the head of every street” refers to the fact that these atrocities occurred in public places in full view of everyone. All over the city and without shame or remorse the invaders cruelly destroyed the innocent children of Thebes.
Third, the noble men of Thebes became slaves to the attackers.62The invaders cast lots to determine who would obtain which slave. Those who ruled the city became the object of gamblers. Casting lots for the inhabitants of the city is found often in the Old Testament (Obad 11; Joel 3:3). Clark and Hatton described the casting of lots as possibly referring to writing the names of persons on stones with the stones placed in some kind of container before being cast to the ground. The first stone hitting the ground indicated the person chosen.63
Fourth, the leading men of Thebes tramped off to exile in chains, a common practice in ancient times (2 Kgs 25:7; Isa 45:14; Jer 40:1, 4). The great men who decided the lives of others and determined the direction of the nation felt the helplessness of going bound hand and foot into exile. “The fate of Thebes would lead Assyria to expect that its punishment might follow the same lines.”64
62Coggins and Re’emi point to similar language in Isa 3:5; 13:16; 20:4; 23:8; and particularly Ps 149:8 to conclude that “the parallel is so close as to suggest either that this language was regularly used in oracles against foreign nations or perhaps, more specifically, that it may have been part of some liturgy associated with holy war” (Israel among the Nations, 53).
63Clark and Hatton,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 52.
64Baker, “Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah,” 38.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 232–234.
11-13절) 이제 선지자는 노아몬과 같이 너희도 견디지 못하고 비참한 종말을 맞이할 것에 대해서 예언한다. 그는 다섯가지의 비유를 통해 종말을 예언한다.
1) 술에 취하여 숨는 사람들
2) 원수들을 피해서 피난처로 도망가는 사람들
3) 처음 익은 열매처럼 흔블면 떨어지는 무화과 나무
4) 연약한 여인
5) 열린 성문과 불타버린 빗장
나훔은 비유를 적절하게 사용하고 있다. 2:1-13에서는 앗수르를 먹이가 없는 사자로, 3:1-7에서는 수치와 수모를 당하는 창녀로, 본문에서는 술취하여 몸을 가눌 줄 모르는 사람으로 묘사한다. 니느웨가 공격을 받아 노아몬처럼 무너지게 될때 마치 흔들기만 하면 떨어지는 무화과 나무를 입에 넣는 것과 같이, 누워서 떡먹기처럼 쉬운 일이라는 것이다. 한때 근동을 호령하던 애굽(노아몬)과 앗수르(니느웨)가 이렇게 몰락하고 멸망을 당했다. 결국 이 텍스트를 통해 나훔이 이야기하고자 하는 바는 앗수르나 애굽의 국력을 비교하는 것이 아니라 세상의 모든 권세는 하나님앞에 아무것도 아니라는 사실을 강조하는 것이다.
- As Achtemeier emphasizes, “Nahum is a master of metaphor.… In 2:1–13 Nineveh was a lion deprived of its prey, in 3:1–7 a harlot shamed and exposed. Now, in this taunt song, Nineveh becomes a drunk, weak and dazed.”67
67Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 25.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 234.
앗수르(니느웨)는 노아몬(테베)과 같이 자신들의 지리적인 위치(강과 바다)와 자신들의 연합군, 지원군들 그리고 산성과 잘 훈련된 병사들이 자신들을 보호해 줄 것이라고 믿었다. 하지만 이러한 것들을 그들의 보호자가 되지 못한다. 누구도 하나님의 진노에서 이들을 보호해 줄 수 없는 것이다.
그 안에는 거짓이 가득하고 포악이 가득하며 탈취가 떠나지 않고 있었다. 이로 인해서 이 피의 성에는 화가 임했다.
본문에서 ‘화 있을진저’라는 표현은 하나님의 심판을 표현하는 표현으로 구약에서 53번이나 사용되는데 장례식의 조가로 8번, 관심을 갖기 위한 부르짖음으로 4번, 선지서들에서 다가오는 멸망을 선포할 때 41번 사용되었다.
피의 성이라는 니느웨, 앗수르에 대한 표현은 매우 적절하다. 앗수르는 고대 근동지역에서 가장 잔인한 민족의 하나로 알려진 민족이었다.
살만에셀 (Shalmaneser III) (858-824BC)은 한 도시를 점령하고 나서 다음과 같은 회고를남겼다: “나는 마치 아다드(아시리아의 신)가 폭풍우를 내리듯이 적군들에게 임하여 그들을 죽였다. 그들이 파놓은 방어 구덩이를 그들의 시체로 가득 채웠고 넓은 들판을 그들의 시체로 덮었다. 나는 양털에 빨간물을 들이듯이 산들을 그들의 피로 물들였다. 냐는 많은 병거들과 말을 빼앗았으며 그들의 성읍앞에 해골더미를 쌓았다. 나는 그들의 다른 도시도 불태웠다”(ANET).
아시리아는 또한 다음과 같은 만행을 일삼았다. 사람의 손, 발, 귀, 코를 자르고 눈을 파내는 것은 일상적으로 하던 일이었다. 사람들의 목을 잘라서 끈으로 동여매어 도성의 문 앞에 쌓아두거나 걸어두었다. 심지어는 살아있는 사람의 가죽을 벗기기까지 했다. 마치 제2차 세계대전 때 독일이 유태인들에게 저지른 만행을 방불케 한다. 아시리아 사람들이 이처럼 잔인하고 포악한 짓들을 일삼았으니 선하신 창조주가 결코 그들의 만행을 오래 방관하실리 없다.
- 3:1“Woe” is a word characteristic of the prophets. Translators use several different words to communicate the distinctive meaning of the Hebrew word(hôy). “Ho,” “Ah,” “Alas,” and “Shame on you” all describe the meaning of the Hebrew term. The word usually announces a theme of judgment.
Though the term “woe” is found in many books of the Old Testament, the prophets used it most often and in relationship to God’s divine judgment. In the present context the word is a statement rather than a wish. In this sense the usage runs parallel to Nahum’s certainty of the destruction of Nineveh. The GNB catches the inevitable judgment against Nineveh: “Doomed is the lying, murderous city.” Of the fifty-three occurrences in the Old Testament, R. J. Clifford listed three possible uses forhôy: (1) to describe funeral laments (eight times), usually translated “alas”; (2) a cry to get attention (four times), usually translated “ho” or “ah”; (3) and announcement of doom (forty-one times and used only by the prophets), usually translated “woe to.”3
The use of “woe” can be understood as a curse or as a lament. The prophets used the term in both ways.4As a curse the prophet used the term to indicate the certainty of judgment. In Israel and among other nations, the spoken word possessed the ability to bring its own result. No wonder kings kept scores of loyal prophets always ready to pronounce good things for the king.
Many times the term “woe” is used as a lament (Jer 22:18; 34:5), but this does not seem to be the force of Nahum.5Nahum confidently predicted the downfall of Nineveh. Any lament would be for effect, not sorrow.6
GNBGood News Bible
3R. J. Clifford, “The Use ofHôyin the Prophets,”CBQ28 (1966): 458–64.
4O. P. Robertson insists the woe exclamation (הוי) “does not precisely communicate a curse, a woe. Instead, it gives expression to an agony, a pain at an offense being witnessed. It hurts to watch people being slowly crushed by a system calculated to squeeze the last breath from the defenseless” (The Books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, NICOT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990], 100).
5R. D. Patterson sees “woe” as a “word drawn from a lamentation liturgy for the dead” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, WEC, ed. K. Barker [Chicago: Moody, 1991], 81). He finds three parts to the woe oracle: invective (vv. 1, 7), threat (vv. 2–3, 5–6), criticism (v. 4). T. Longman III likewise sees funeral processions in the background, saying: “The association of the word with death probably led the prophets to use it as they foresaw destruction coming” (“Nahum,” inThe Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, ed. T. E. McComiskey [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993], 812). He then continues, however, in the opposite direction in applying this to Nahum: “In many of the prophetic uses, and certainly in the use here in Nahum,hôyno longer marks an expression of lamentation for the dead. On the contrary, Nahum is far from lamenting the coming destruction of vicious Nineveh. Indeed he can hardly restrain his joy at the prospect.Hôyhas become a threat or a curse directed against the enemies of God.”
6Note the discussion of “woe” by E. R. Dalglish, “Nahum,” inHosea–Malachi, BBC (Nashville: Broadman, 1972), 7:242; and R. Smith,Micah–Malachi, 86, and E. Gerstenberger, “The Woe Oracles of the Prophets,”JBL81 (1962): 249–63. Dalglish sees the present verse as an oracle of woe rather than lament and numbers thirty-six of fifty-one occurrences of “woe” as a curse, but Gerstenberger argues against this assessment. R. J. Clifford felt certain that Nahum spoke a word of judgment (CBQ28 [1996]: 462). D. W. Baker correctly notes that the use of the woe form here is ironic, since the demise of the tyrant would be welcomed, not mourned” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, TOTC [Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1988], 23b, 36).
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 218–219.
2-3절) 본절은 매우 생생한 언어로 앗수르가 대적들에게 만행을 당하는 모습을 표현한다. 휙휙 하는 채찍 소리, 윙윙 하는 병거 바퀴 소리, 뛰는 말, 달리는 병거, 충돌하는 기병, 번쩍이는 칼, 번개 같은 창, 죽임 당한 자의 떼, 주검의 큰 무더기, 무수한 시체, 그리고 그 시체에 걸려 넘어지는 사람들
대적들이 말과 병거를 몰고 채찍과 칼, 창을 휘두르면서 수많은 이들을 죽이는 모습을 보여준다. 이들이 달려와 그들의 칼과 창을 휘두를 때마다 사상자가 속출하고 이로 인해서 많은 이들이 도망가다가 시체에 걸려서 넘어진다. 하나님께서는 앗수르가 다른 나라에게 무자비하게 행한대로 갚아주고 계신 것이다.
4절) 니느웨가 심판을 받아야 하는 이유를 다시 한 번 제시한다.
앞선 모습처럼 이들이 심판을 당하는 이유는 니느웨가 마술에 능숙한 미모의 음녀로 많은 음행을 행했기 때문이다. 앗수르는 그의 음행으로 여러 나라를 미혹하고 그의 마술로 여러 족속을 미혹했다. 마치 여인이 자신의 미모를 동원하여 뭇 남자들을 홀리고 마술로 속이는 것으로 묘사하고 있는 것이다. 앗수르는 막강한 군사력과 권력을 앞세워서 다른 나라를 착취하고 거짓 약속등을 통해서 다른 나라들을 속였다. 앗수르가 엄청난 부와 권력을 획득한 것에 대해서 하나님께서는 이들의 행위를 창녀의 음행으로 평가하고 있으신 것이다.
- 3:4Reasons for Judgment: The Wickedness of Nineveh.This verse uses figurative language to present reasons for the destruction of Nineveh.whorings. As the capital of idolatrous Assyria, Nineveh continually engaged in many violations of God’s will.graceful … deadly charms. Nineveh, with its power and wealth, exerted a corrupting influence throughout the Near East (cf. 2 Kings 16:18).betrays. The monarchy based in Nineveh did not hesitate to use treachery and deceit (see Nah. 3:1) to achieve its aims.
3:4Nineveh’s punishment prefigures the punishment for the idolatrous seduction of Babylon the prostitute (Rev. 17:1–6; 18:1–3).
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1716.
- The theme of Nineveh as a prostitute who enticed the nations continues through v. 7 and is a fairly common theme in Scripture.22Revelation 17–18 also describe the enemies of God in terms of the harlot. The most common use of the metaphor is found with the people of God. The adultery motif vividly describes the seriousness of the people’s turning away from God. This is not, however, the meaning of the current metaphor. Assyria had not worshiped the Lord. Nahum’s use of the prostitution metaphor stemmed from two sources.
First, Nineveh’s political leadership behaved as a prostitute, enticing poorer and weaker nations with its wealth and charms. “As a harlot dispenses her favors ‘for hire’ …, so Nineveh, like a scheming prostitute, has cunningly sold her military aid to other countries.”23The weaker nations fell victim to the allure of Assyria’s wealth and power. They looked to Assyria for protection and material wealth, but they soon learned that, like the prostitute, the promises of Assyria only led to destruction. Nineveh “sacrificed any semblance of morality to personal interest.”24
A prime example of the allure of Assyria was the enticement of Ahaz of Judah. During the Syro-Ephraimitic crisis, Ahaz refused to listen to the words of Isaiah the prophet, choosing rather to accept the protection of the Assyrian king (Isa 7:1–8:8). Ahaz rejected the Lord’s protection and aligned himself with Assyria.
Tiglath-pileser III of Assyria happily came to the aid of Ahaz. In the pattern of many other despots, he used the protection of his friend Ahaz as an excuse to take Damascus and to ravage the northern tribes of Israel in 732 b.c. This action set in place the eventual capture of Samaria by the Assyrians in 722 b.c. and began a century of Assyrian domination of Judah. Objects of Assyrian worship were set up in the temple, and Judah followed the path of idolatry championed by Assyria (2 Kgs 16:10–16). During the long reign of Manasseh (696–641 b.c.), Judah prostituted itself by following the harlot Assyria (2 Kgs 21:1–26).
Second, sacred prostitution played a large part in the worship of the chief deity of the Assyrians, Ishtar. Worshipers of Ishtar often referred to her as a prostitute.25“Nahum’s chief complaint against Nineveh is for its spiritual atrocities.”26“All because of the wanton lust of a harlot” indicates that Assyria’s destruction (Nah 3:1–3) came because of its evil deeds. The Lord God is the righteous judge of the universe. Evil cannot go unpunished. God will end oppression.
Much like the writer of Proverbs, Nahum described the wiles of the harlot. “For the lips of an adulteress drip honey, and her speech is smoother than oil; but in the end she is bitter as gall, sharp as a double-edged sword” (Prov 5:3–4). She is “fair and graceful, a mistress of witchcraft.” In this instance “sorceries,” or “witchcraft,” refers to her spells and charms.27“Assyrians were utterly superstitious and wholly dedicated to sorcery.”28The nations had been spellbound to the power of Assyria only ultimately to regret her allure.
Lines three and four in the Hebrew text use important words (zĕnûnîm, “lust/prostitution,” andkĕšāpîm, “sorceries/witchcraft”) from lines one and two. Assyria the harlot “enslaved” nations by its prostitution. The Hebrew text uses the word “sold”(mākar), thus leading to the idea in the NIV of being sold into slavery. “The corrupt capital sold nations, so that their people individually became slaves to the Assyrians and others.”29Assyria also enslaved nations by witchcraft. “By unholy means, dark, treacherous dealings, she relegates ‘peoples’ (smaller nations or racial groups, Jer 25:9; Ezek 20:32; Amos 3:2) into slavery.”30This probably is a correct association. Assyria’s attraction lured nations into league with Assyria only to learn too late that association with Assyria often led to loss of land and loss of life. This is what happened to Samaria and to many other states in Palestine.
22Longman notes that “from the Israelite perspective, the most wicked types of females were prostitutes and sorceresses. These women sought money and domination beyond acceptable social and religious norms” (“Nahum,” 815).
23Maier,The Book of Nahum, 302.
24Armerding, “Habakkuk,” 7:481.
25Clark and Hatton,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 44.
26Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 90.
27Robertson describes Assyria’s sorcery: “The city is no amateur in the art of sorcery. She is a master at black magic. Rather than doing what is right and leaving the future to God, this entire community sets to itself the task of determining the course of the future so that it will result in its own benefit. Employing every means—even resorting to the trade of the wizard—the inhabitants of Nineveh deny the sovereignty of God over the affairs of men” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 103).
28Maier,The Book of Nahum, 302.
NIV New International Version
29Ibid., 304.
30Ibid.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 223–225.
5-7절) 심판을 선포하시는 하나님
음행하며 유혹하는 음녀인 니느웨는 그가 행한 수치스럽고 가증한 일에 대해서 심판을 받게 될 것이다. 하나님께서는 그의 치마를 걷어 올려서 벌거벗은 부끄러운 모습을 뭇 나라와 민족들에게 보일 것임을 말씀하신다. 또한 하나님께서 가증하고 더러운 것들을 그들 위에 던져서 능욕하여 구경거리가 되게 하신다고 말씀하신다. 그 때에 그(니느웨)를 보는 자가 다 도망하며 ‘니느웨가 황폐되었도도’, ‘누가 그것을 위하여 애곡하며 내가 어디서 너를 위로할 자를 구할까’라고 할 것이다.
앗수르가 집권했을 때 다른 민족들을 두려워하며 그를 좇았지만 하나님께서 그들을 심판하신 후 앗수르는 멸시와 천대의 대상이 된다. 하나님께서 그들로 부끄러운 모습을 당하게 하실 것이고 가증하고 더러운 것, 오물들을 앗수르에 던져 능욕을 당하게 하실 것이다. 이에 수치와 능욕을 당하는 니느웨를 보고 그에게 다가가 그를(앗수르) 도와주기는 커녕 지저분하게 여기면서 멀리 달아날 것이다. 그가 힘과 권력을 가졌을때는 그에게 머리를 조아렸지만 그가 패배하자 아무도 그를 위해 애곡하거나 위로할 자가 없을 것이다.
13 mBehold, I am against you, declares the Lord of hosts, andnI will burn your6chariots in smoke, and the sword shall devour your young lions. I will cut off your prey from the earth, andothe voice of your messengers shall no longer be heard.
bSee ch. 1:1
5Compare Septuagint; the meaning of the Hebrew is uncertain
cJer. 46:5
dSee Zeph. 2:13–15
ePs. 22:14; Isa. 13:7
fDan. 5:6
gIsa. 21:3
hJoel 2:6
iIsa. 5:29; Jer. 2:15
jSee Isa. 17:2
k[Ezek. 19:3]
l[ver. 9; ch. 3:1]
mch. 3:5; [Zeph. 2:5]; See Ezek. 13:8
n[Ps. 46:9]
6Hebrewher
o[2 Kgs. 19:9, 23]
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 나 2:8–13.
8◎니느웨는 예로부터 물이 모인 못 같더니 이제 모두 도망하니 서라 서라 하나 돌아보는 자가 없도다
9은을 노략하라 금을 노략하라 그 저축한 것이 무한하고 아름다운 기구가 풍부함이니라
10니느웨가 공허하였고 황폐하였도다 주민이 낙담하여 그 무릎이 서로 부딪히며 모든 허리가 아프게 되며 모든 낯이 빛을 잃도다
11이제 사자의 굴이 어디냐 젊은 사자가 먹을 곳이 어디냐 전에는 수사자 암사자가 그 새끼 사자와 함께 거기서 다니되 그것들을 두렵게 할 자가 없었으며
12수사자가 그 새끼를 위하여 먹이를 충분히 찢고 그의 암사자들을 위하여 움켜 사냥한 것으로 그 굴을 채웠고 찢은 것으로 그 구멍을 채웠었도다
13만군의 여호와의 말씀에 내가 네 대적이 되어 네 병거들을 불살라 연기가 되게 하고 네 젊은 사자들을 칼로 멸할 것이며 내가 또 네 노략한 것을 땅에서 끊으리니 네 파견자의 목소리가 다시는 들리지 아니하리라 하셨느니라
The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 나 2:8–13.
8-10절) 약탈 당하는 니느웨
앞서 니느웨가 명시된 적은 없다. 여기에 니느웨가 처음 언급된다. 앞서 6절에서 강들의 수문이 열린 것이 언급되는데 니느웨는 티그리스 강 서쪽 둑에 세워진 도시로 중앙에는 코서 강이 흘렀다. 물이 니느웨를 번성하게 했지만 이제 물로 인해서 심판과 멸망이 임하는 것이다.
니느웨는 물이 가득한 연못과 같았는데 이제 그 물이 빠져 나가고 있다. 줄줄 새는 연못이 된 것이다. 성안의 사람들이 연합군의 공격으로 인해 모두 도망가는데 ‘서라 서라’라고 외치지만 이를 돌아보는 자가 없다. 본문에서 ‘서라’고 말하는 사람이 침략자들인지 아니면 성을 방어하기 위해서 애쓰는 장교인지 알 수 없다. 이들은 지금 공포에 사로잡혀서 뒤도 돌아보지 않고 도망가고 있는 것이다. 니느웨는 지난 200여년 동안 근동지역의 패권자로 주변 나라들을 침략하여 약탈과 만행을 저질렀다. 이웃 나라들이 가지고 있던 수많은 보물들과 재화들을 약탈했고 또한 그들에게 엄청난 양의 조공을 바치게 하여서 수많은 금과 은, 보물들을 가지고 있었다. 그런데 이제 그 모든 것들을 약탈 당하고 있는 것이다. 풍요롭던 니느웨가 이제 공허하고 황폐하게 되었다. 그곳의 주민들의 상황은 이렇게 묘사된다. ‘떨리는 가슴, 후들거리는 무릎, 끊어질 것 같이 아픈 허리, 그리고 하얗게 질린 얼굴’, 이제까지 주위의 많은 이들의 피눈물을 흘리게 했던 이들이 당하는 고통이다. 위대하던 앗수르는 이제 완전히 무너져 내린 것이다.
10절의 처음 ‘니느웨가 공허하였고 황폐하였도다’라는 표현은 히브리어로 비슷한 발음으로 표현된다. 이를 GNB는 이렇게 번역했다. ’Nineveh is destoryed, deserted, desolate!'
- “Pillaged, plundered, and stripped” all sound alike in Hebrew and have similar meanings(bûqâ ûmĕbûqâ ûmĕbullāqâ).64Though different translations attempt to duplicate the paronomasia into English (e.g., GNB uses “Nineveh is destroyed, deserted, desolate!”), the power of Nahum’s message comes through without the duplication of the Hebrew verse. Nahum’s pictorial language vividly describes the fear of the people of Nineveh. “The sight would send such a shudder through the strongest people that uncontrollable trembling would seize the entire body and their faces blanch. The portrayal is one of abject terror, painted again in synecdoche and picturesque brevity: melting hearts, knees knocking together, bodies writhing, faces made colorless with fright.”65Nineveh’s reign of terror would end. In Nineveh the people faint before the sure end of Assyria’s dominance.
64Robertson notes the rhythmic effect of Nahum’s language. “Each successive word is slightly longer than the former, so that a rhythmic buildup reinforces the message. The first two terms occur only here in the OT, and the third appears elsewhere only in Isa 24:1, where it is connected again with the verbbāqaq” (Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 94).
GNBGood News Bible
65Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 64.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 210.
11-12절) 사자는 힘과 민첩성, 주권을 상징하는 짐승으로 동물의 왕으로 불리운다. 이 강력한 포식자가 잡아 먹히는 짐승들에게는 두려움의 표상이었다. 전통적으로 앗수르는 자신들을 사자와 연관시켰다. 앗수를 왕들은 자신들을 사자로 묘사했고, 그들의 수호신 이스타르가 암사자로, 혹은 사자를 타고 있는 모습으로 자주 등장한다.
선지자는 ‘사자의 굴이 어디 있느냐?’, ‘젊은 사가가 먹을 곳이 어디 있느냐’라고 묻는다. 이전에는 수사자 암사자가 그 새끼 사자와 함께 거기서 다닐 때 그것들을 두렵게 할 자가 없었다는 것이다. 그곳에서 수사자가 그 새끼를 위해서 먹이를 충분히 찢고 그의 암사자를 위해서 움켜 사냥한 것으로 그 굴을 채웠고 찢은 것으로 그 구멍을 채웠었다.
그런데 이제 그 굴이 없어졌다는 것이다. 12절은 이전 앗수르가 얼마나 포악하게 주변을 침략하여 빼앗고 약탈했는지를 보여준다. 그들은 자신들의 배를 치우고 자신들의 자녀들을 위해서 남들을 무자비하게 착취하였다. 이제 그 사자의 굴이 없어져 버린 것이다.
- Assyrian chronicles and sculpture repeatedly referred to the lion. Assyrian kings often presented themselves in terms that resembled the behavior of lions,71and the Assyrians boasted of their cruelty toward their enemies. Ishtar, the Assyrian goddess, was often represented as a lioness or as mounted on a lion’s back.72Nahum thus mocked Assyria’s tactics and its success. To the people of Judah the effect was: How the mighty have fallen!
Nahum asked two rhetorical questions. The effect was to ask, Where now was the lion’s den where he fed his cubs and dwelt in safety? What had happened to mighty Nineveh? God’s judgment had come even to the lion’s den—to Nineveh. The people of Judah no longer would fear the savagery of the lion of Assyria. Coggins and Re’emi point out that on another level “Yahweh himself can be alluded to in the prophetic tradition as a lion (cf. the picture of his roaring in Amos 1:2 and the direct comparison made in Amos 3:8), and that tradition appears to have been in our prophet’s mind in this poem.” They recognize, however, that the more prominent reference here is to the Assyrian rulers as lions.73
Nahum used several words meaning lion, thus driving home the point of Nineveh’s demise.74In a sense Nahum spoke of the entire Assyrian society. Kings, queens, and princes manifested the beastly traits of lions. All suffered the fate of ruin. They no longer could enjoy the spoil of the nations. They no longer could dwell in safety. Most importantly, they no longer could command fear from the peoples of the world.
The “lion’s den” is a metaphor for Nineveh, a place of safety and rejoicing over the prey. “The place where they fed their young” usually refers to a pasture in Hebrew but may here be understood as “feeding place.”75The place “where the lion and lioness went” is another metaphor for Nineveh.76In this place the lion, lioness, and the whelps could roam in safety, oblivious to the dangers of the outside world. All such safety ended for Nineveh.
71Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 95.
72J. D. W. Watts, “Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah,” 114.
73Coggins and Re’emi,Israel among the Nations, 44. See Isa 5:29.
74Nahum spoke of the full-grown male lion (אַריֵה), the lioness or possibly Asiatic lion (לָבִיא), the young lion (כְפִיר), and the whelp (גוּר).
75BHS suggests transposing two Hb. letters, resulting in “cave” rather than “pasture” or “feeding place.” While the transposition better fits the parallelism, the sense of the passage is not unduly affected by “feeding place,” and no manuscript or versional evidence exists to strengthen the transposition. Maier (The Book of Nahum, 278–79) says the emphasis is not on a pasture as a locality but on the food provided by the pasture. Thus he translates “fodder,” which he sees as a figure for “booty.” Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 77) argues that the term refers to “open country” and “may intend simply the district where the lion’s cave was found.”
76The LXX uses εἰσελθεῖν, “to enter,” which in Hb. (לָבוֹא) would be only slightly different from lioness (לָבִיא). Those who follow the LXX understand this as a reference to the lion’s return to his den after hunting.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 212–213.
13절) 사자처럼 호령하던 앗수르가 이렇게 갑자기 무너져버린 이유는 무엇인가? 바로 여호와 하나님이 그들의 대적이 되셨기 때문이다. 하나님께서는 이처럼 무자비하게 다른 이들을 억압하여 풍요로움을 누리는 것을 용납하지 않으시고 그들을 심판하신 것이다.
만군의 여호와께서 앗수르의 대적이 되셔서 그들의 병거를 불살라 연기가 되게 하고 젊은 사자들을 칼로 멸한 것이며 당에서 네가 노략한 것을 끊을 것이며 또한 더이상 너의 파견자의 목소리가 들리지 않을 것이다라고 말씀하셨다.
만군의 여호와께서 우리편이 되시면 대적할 자들이 없다. 반대로 하나님께서 우리의 반대편, 대적이 되시면 이에 견딜 자가 없다. 앗수르는 하나님의 대적이 되어 병거들이 불타없어지고, 젊은 사자들, 젊은이들을 멸하심으로 그들의 미래가 없어지게 하셨다. 또한 모든 노략한 것을 빼았겼고 도움을 청하기 위해서 달려가는 파견자들의 목소리가 들리지 않게 하셨다. 결국 완전한 멸망을 당함으로 다시는 회복되지 못할 것임을 말하는 것이다.
병거, 젊은 사자, 노략한 것, 파견자는 모두 앗수르의 강력함을 상징하는 것들이다. 그런데 하나님께서 이 모든 것들을 파하실 것임을 말하고 있는 것이다.
앞서 3-4절의 병거는 불타고, 젊은 사자는 죽임을 당한다. 1장 15절에서 이스라엘에 화평을 전하는 자의 소리는 들리겠지만 앗수르의 메신저의 소리를 다시 들리지 않게 될 것이다.
- 2:13 I am against you.This divine pronouncement says it all. The final verse of ch. 2 recalls earlier images in the chapter: chariots (vv. 3–4), now up in smoke; young lions (vv. 11–12), now themselves prey to the sword; and messengers, now “no longer … heard” (v. 1 in the Hebrew text [1:15 in the English text]). The Lord’s vengeance (righteous judgment; see note on 1:2), when it comes, is irresistible and final.
ch.chapter
vv.verses in the chapter being commented on
vv.verses in the chapter being commented on
v.verse in the chapter being commented on
D. A. Carson, ed.,NIV Biblical Theology Study Bible(Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2018), 1608.
- “Chariots,” “lions,” “prey,” and “messengers” referred to the strength of the Assyrians. The Lord himself intended to reduce Nineveh’s strength to rubble. Chariots intimidated opposing warriors. At times the chariot contained three soldiers: a driver, a shield bearer, and a warrior. The swift movement of the chariot with the power of its horses and the ferocity of the warrior struck terror in ancient people.86Again the Lord used Nineveh’s methods to punish them. Nineveh used the chariot to intimidate and to destroy. The warriors of Nineveh left the ruins of its enemies in smoke. God would use the same means to bring an end to Nineveh and to deliver the people of Judah.
The “young lions” connects this verse with the preceding verses, where the lions referred to the power of Nineveh. Though the phrase does not mean much to people unaccustomed to warfare using the sword, the Hebrew text expresses the horror of the sword, “And your young lions will be eaten with the sword.”
The picture of the young lions continues in the next clause: “I will leave you no prey on the earth” (lit., “I will cut off from the earth your prey”). Nineveh had prospered at the expense of its subjugated people. If Nineveh’s armies could not bring back its prey, Nineveh itself would suffer and ultimately fall prey to a greater force.
Nineveh sent its messengers87and envoys throughout its sphere of influence. Now “the haughty city will have no more representative heralds, for no nation remains to be represented.”88In Rabshakeh’s negotiations with Hezekiah’s messengers, Rabshakeh’s messengers spoke with the authority of the king and sought to undermine the resistance of the besieged peoples (1 Kgs 18:19–21, 26–27). This shows that “messengers from the Assyrian king were not simply bringers of information; rather, they symbolized the threat that failure to conform to the demand implicit in their message would bring swift and disastrous punishment from the great king of Assyria.”89Now such messengers were silenced. No one faced their demands anymore. God had spoken the final word.
Verse 13 contains four evidences of the coming end of Nineveh. Because the awesome Lord of the universe is against Nineveh, (1) Nineveh’s chariots would be burned, (2) the sword would devour its soldiers, (3) no prey would be brought back to Nineveh, and (4) the voice of its messengers would be stilled. With vivid words and powerful metaphors, Nahum described the coming destruction of Nineveh as if it had already taken place. The Lord reigns. No nation can long endure that turns its back on God. Israel’s apostasy and Nineveh’s arrogance would both be punished.
Thus “this verse draws together the major motifs and vocabulary of Nahum’s prophecy: the Lord’s inexorable opposition to Nineveh; the destruction of its military resources; the role of ‘sword’ and ‘fire’ that ‘consume’ the enemy; the cutting off of Nineveh and its ‘prey’; the termination of its cruelty, symbolized by the ‘young lions’; and the reversal of fortunes that awaits Assyria and Judah, exemplified in the fate of the ‘heralds.’ ”90
Through these verses the Lord showed himself to be the Lord of the universe, working through history to accomplish his righteous purpose in the world. Nahum declared the Lord’s compassion for Judah by indicating the Lord’s removal of the oppressor.
86The Hb. text seems strange at this point, reading lit., “I will burn in the smoke her chariot.” The remainder of the verse uses “your” to refer to the Assyrians, and the entire verse is a direct address of the Lord to the Assyrians. For these reasons many translations follow the LXX, which declares God’s intention to burn πλῆθός σου, “your multitude.” BHS proposes “your chariot,” which is followed by the NIV. Other proposals in BHS include “your resting place” and “your thicket.” Each of the proposals has some merit, but the point is clear in all of the ideas: the Lord is against Nineveh and will destroy the power of Nineveh.
87For “your messengers” the MT hasמַלְאָכֵֽכֵה, a “wholly abnormal” form for the second person suffix. GKC (§ 91l) suggests this is a case of dittography with the followingהand recommends readingמַלְאָכַיִךְ.
88Maier,The Book of Nahum, 286.
89Coggins and Re’emi,Israel among the Nations, 46.
90Armerding, “Habakkuk,” 7:479.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 215–216.
3The meaning of the Hebrew word renderedits mistressis uncertain
y[Isa. 22:8]
4Orexiled
zIsa. 38:14
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 나 2:1–7.
2파괴하는 자가 너를 치러 올라왔나니 너는 산성을 지키며 길을 파수하며 네 허리를 견고히 묶고 네 힘을 크게 굳게 할지어다
2여호와께서 야곱의 영광을 회복하시되 이스라엘의 영광 같게 하시나니 이는 약탈자들이 약탈하였고 또 그들의 포도나무 가지를 없이 하였음이라
3그의 용사들의 방패는 붉고 그의 무사들의 옷도 붉으며 그 항오를 벌이는 날에 병거의 쇠가 번쩍이고 노송나무 창이 요동하는도다
4그 병거는 미친 듯이 거리를 달리며 대로에서 이리저리 빨리 달리니 그 모양이 횃불 같고 빠르기가 번개 같도다
5그가 그의 존귀한 자들을 생각해 내니 그들이 엎드러질 듯이 달려서 급히 성에 이르러 막을 것을 준비하도다
6강들의 수문이 열리고 왕궁이 소멸되며
7정한 대로 왕후가 벌거벗은 몸으로 끌려가니 그 모든 시녀들이 가슴을 치며 비둘기 같이 슬피 우는도다
The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 나 2:1–7.
본문은 니느웨가 어떻게 멸망하는지를 보여준다.
1절) 나훔 선지자는 니느웨에 적군이 쳐들어왔고 이에 니느웨(앗수르)에게 이를 대적하여 잘 방어해보라고 말한다. 이는 그들의 멸망을 바라는 비웃음에 가깝다. 선지자는 그들에게
산성(요새)를 지키며
길을 파수하며
네 허리를 견고히 묶고
네 힘을 크게 굳게하라고 충고한다.
하지만 본문은 아직 명시적으로 누가 누구를 치는지를 특정하고 있지는 않는다. 이는 선지서의 예언의 특성이다. 이후 8절이 되어서야 이 멸망의 대상이 니느웨라고 특정한다.
니느웨를 파괴하는 자들이 누구였을까? 나훔은 누가 니느웨를 공격할지를 알고 있었을까? 아마도 메대인과 바벨론인 그리고 스구디아인으로 구성된 연합군이었을 것이다. 나훔은 정확히 누가 니느웨를 공격할지는 몰랐지만 바로 하나님께서 이 일을 이루실 것을 알았다. 앗수르는 주변의 나라들을 매우 무자비하게 짓밟아 왔다. 이들을 이제 하나님께서 치시는 것이다.
- When Nineveh fell in 612 b.c., the shatterer was a coalition of Medes and Babylonians under Cyaxeres and Nebuchadnezzar. We do not know whether or not Nahum knew this. For Nahum the ultimate shatterer was God himself. No matter who the human agent of destruction might be, God rendered the Assyrians powerless. He planned to rescue the peoples of the world and particularly to rescue his chosen people from the iron hand of the oppressor.
God had decreed the destruction of Nineveh. The only thing the people of Nineveh could do was attempt to defend themselves. Human nature demands that citizens fight to defend their lives and their property even when the cause is hopeless.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 197–198.
2절) 선지자는 니느웨에 대한 멸망을 선포하다가 유다를 향한 회복의 메시지를 전한다. 이러한 내용이 부자연스러워 보이지만 앗수르의 멸망이 유다에게는 회복의 메시지이기때문에 문제는 없다.
하나님께서 앗수르를 심판하시는 이유는 야곱의 영광을 회복시키기 위해서이다. 본문의 영광은 ‘가온’이라는 표현으로 영광, 높음, 위엄, 자부심을 뜻하는 단어이다. 하나님께서는 땅에 떨어진 이스라엘의 명예를 회복시키실 것이다.
본문의 영광이라는 단어와 포도나무라는 히브리어가 비슷하다.
- The word “splendor”(gĕʾôn)refers to the former majesty of the nation Israel. The Hebrew word means “height” (Job 38:11) and thus eminence either as pride (Exod 15:7; Isa 24:14; Mic 5:3) or as presumption (Jer 13:9; Ezek 16:56; Hos 5:7; 7:10).18By 627 b.c. Israel had fallen to the Assyrians almost a century earlier, and Judah consisted of a small area surrounding Jerusalem. The former splendor of the nation now consisted only of ancient memories. With the ascendance of Josiah to the throne of Judah in 627 b.c. and the corresponding death of Ashurbanipal of Assyria, a series of events began that saw the literal return of much of the glory of Israel.
Some translations use the word “vine” in place of the word “splendor.”19The two words are the same except for one Hebrew letter. Hebrew parallelism would normally call for “vine” since the last phrase literally reads “and they have ruined their branches.” “Branches” and “vines” would be parallel. The NIV attempts to follow the Hebrew but also to emphasize the importance of the imagery of the vine by translating “and have ruined their vines.”20
The imagery of the vine is present in the use of the word “branches” in the last section of the verse. In the Old Testament the vine often indicated the nation Israel (Gen 49:22; Isa 5:1–7; Jer 2:21; 12:10; Ps 80:8–16). “The overall theme of this verse is not really changed whichever wording is followed” since the difference is between a figurative expression (“vine”) or a literal one (“splendor”).21
18HALOT1:169.DCH(2:293) includes “magnificence” among the definitions. It is especially used of the “splendor of the southern region of the Jordan with its lush vegetation, where lions lurked” (I. Cornelius, “גָּאוֹן,”NIDOTTE1:789).
19See especially the JB and Moffatt. This involves an unsupported textual emendation ofגאוֹנtoגפנ. Against this see Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 58.
NIV New International Version
20Longman sees “songs” as another possible translation, indicating the cessation of singing during battle. He compares Isa 24 (“Nahum,” 802).
21Clark and Hatton,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 27.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 200.
3-5절) 본 절은 니느웨를 공격하는 자들을 생생하게 묘사한다.
그 용사들의 방패는 붉고, 그의 무사들의 옷은 붉으며(보라색) 그 항오를 벌이는 날에 병거가 쇠를 번쩍이며 나아오고 노송나무의 창이 요동을 친다. 그 병거는 엄청난 속도로 거리를 달리며 이리저리 달리는 그것이 횃불같고 번개같이 빠르다. 그가 그의 존귀한 자들을 기억하고 그들이 엎어지면서도 달려 돌격하여 급히 성문에 이르러서 성벽을 부수는 장치를 준비한다.
당시 첨단무기라고 할 수 있는 병거를 앞세워서 니느웨를 치러 달려오는 적군의 모습을 생생하게 묘사한다. 당시 앗수르를 대적할 나라가 없으리라고 여겨졌지만 선지자는 여호와 하나님께서 이들을 치실 것을 선포한다.
용사들은 붉은 방패와 자주색 군복을 입었다. 어떤 주석가들은 침략자들의 방패와 군복이 피로 얼룩진 것이라고도 말하지만 적들에게 위압감을 주기 위해서 일부러 붉은 색으로 치장한 것으로 보인다. 당시 앗수르 군인들은 청색 혹은 보라색 군복을 입었던 반면(겔 23:6) 메대와 바벨론 사람들은 붉은 군복을 입었던 것으로 알려져있다.(겔 23:14-15) 침략군들의 창은 그 수를 셀 수 없을 정도로 많고 온 땅을 휩쓸듯이 요동친다.
번쩍이는 쇠로 무장한 병거가 빠른 속력으로 질주하면서 적들에게 불 화살을 쏘며 돌진한다. 당시 병거는 1-2차 대전시의 탱크와 같았다. 엄청난 위용을 자랑하며 엄청난 속도로 돌진해오는 병거는 두려움의 상징과도 같았을 것이다.
- 2:3–4shield … red. Either their shields were painted red, or they were permanently stained with the blood of defeated foes from previous military campaigns.His … heis a reference to the scatterer mentioned in v. 1. The attacking army was a coalition made up of Medes and Babylonians, and possibly Scythians. Cyaxares (625–585 b.c.) was the leader of the Medes (who p 1715 played the dominant role in the destruction of Nineveh), and Nabopolassar (626–605) led the Babylonians. Thestreetsandsquaresare those of the suburbs surrounding Nineveh, the first areas to be overrun by the attacking army.flashing metal … gleam like torches. The sunlight reflects off of the metal pieces of the chariots.dart like lightning. This could refer again to the light reflecting, or indicate the swift movement of the chariots.
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1714–1715.
5절의 전반부 문구는 해석이 난해하다. 이를 ‘정예부대를 앞세우고 넘어지지 않으면서 돌격한다’로 해석하기도 하고 ‘지휘자들이 군대를 지휘한다’로 해석하기도 한다. 달려오는자가 누구인가? 침략군들이 달려오는데 그 침략군들이 넘어진다는 것이다. 이는 엄청난 군대의 사기로 인해서 앞서 동료 군사들이 넘어져도 전혀 멈추지 않고 전진하여 온다는 것으로 그 무엇도 이들을 멈출수 없다는 것이다.
니느웨 성을 함락시키기 위해서 엄청난 기세로 달려온 이들은 성에 이르러 막을 것(siege tower)를 준비한다. 이는 공성전에서 성벽을 방어하는 수비병들이 공격하는 군사들을 향해서 아래로 던지는 화살이나 창, 돌들과 같은 것들로 부터 그들을 보호해주기 위한 시설물이라고 할 수 있다.
- 2:5The attacking army now reaches the wall of Nineveh proper.He remembers. “He” (see v. 3) may be so eager to be involved in the attack that he almost forgets to delegate parts of the operation tohis officers. These officers, eager both to join in the attack themselves and to please their superior(s), so rush into the action that they practicallystumbleover one another. Or, as they move toward Nineveh’s wall, they may stumble over the wreckage in the devastated suburbs.siege tower. This could also be rendered “mantelet” (see ESV footnote), a covering that protects the attacking soldiers from arrows, spears, and other objects thrown down on them by the defenders on the wall.
ESV English Standard Version
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1715.
6-7절) 강들의 수문이 열리고 왕궁이 소멸되어 왕후가 벌거벗은 몸으로 끌려가니 모든 시녀들이 그들의 가슴을 치며 비둘기 같이 슬피 운다.
니느웨는 티그리스 강의 서쪽 둑에 세워진 도시로 도시 중심부에 코서 강이 흘러 도시에 생명을 공급했다. 도시 주위의 강은 천연 방어물의 역할을 톡톡히 했다. 하지만 하나님께서 이 싸움에 개입하시자 니느웨에게 유리하게 작용하던 강들이 불리하게 작용하게 된다. 물로 인해서 안전을 보장받았다면 이제 그 물로 인해서 패망하게 된 것이다.
정확하지는 않지만 범람한 물로 인해서 도시의 방어벽이 무너졌을 것으로 보인다. 침략자들이 강의 상류를 점령하여 수위를 조절했을 것이다. 강의 수문을 막아두었다가 갑자기 수문을 열어 많은 물이 쏟아지게 함으로 도시를 물에 잠기게 했을 것이다.
방어막이 뚤린 니느웨는 철저하게 유린당한다. 7절의 본문에 왕후(나차브)라는 표현은 매우 난해한 표현이다. 영어 번역본의 대다수는 이제 (니느웨의 멸망이) 선고되었다’라는 의미로 해석한다. 또 다른 학자들은 이를 후잡이라는 이름으로, 이는 앗수르의 수호신인 이스타르라고 해석한다. 이는 전투에 패배함을 통해서 앗수르의 수호신까지 포로로 끌려감으로 그들이 슬퍼하게 될 것이라는 것이다. 더이상 니느웨는 위엄을 유지하지 못하고 적들에게 수치를 당하게 될 것이라는 것이다.
- 2:6river gates. The Khoser River flowed through Nineveh; north of the city were dams, most likely with gates to regulate the flow of this river. The besieging coalition could easily have closed the gates (cutting off this water supply), waited until a considerable quantity of water collected, and then opened the gates. The resulting mass of water crashing against and through Nineveh would have done much damage to portions of the city’s wall, system of gates, and internal structures, thus greatly aiding the besiegers. Another river that probably flowed through Nineveh was the Tebiltu, which could have been used by the coalition in the same manner. The destruction caused by the waters no doubt was a factor contributing to the short length of the siege—only three months.The palace melts awaybecause of the floodwaters.
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1715.
- 2:7Nahum described the effects of the fall of the city (2:7) once the resistance from the palace collapsed (2:6). Although the effects are certain—people taken into exile, humiliated, and downtrodden—the exact language and meaning is unclear.47The interpretation hinges on two questions. (1) Should the first Hebrew word in v. 7 be understood as a verb (NIV, “it is decreed”)48or as the name of the queen or princess of the city of Nineveh? (2) If the word meant a person, does this mean a literal person such as the queen?49
Or does it refer to the city itself or to a goddess of the city?50If the NIV is correct, the meaning is clear. The city of Nineveh would be stripped and the spoil carried off. The women of Nineveh would go into exile51as slaves.
Taking the word as a proper name graphically describes the fate of the city. “Huzzab,” the queen of the city, faced humiliation and exile. Among the Hebrews nakedness indicated extreme humiliation, even as it would in modern society. If the queen so suffered, could the ordinary citizens of the city fare any better? The queen’s attendants sorrowfully follow her into exile.52
Another interpretation also deserves consideration. Could the proper name indicate the goddess Ishtar? If so, the idol would be stripped of its valuable decorations and be carried into exile with those who worshiped the goddess. Those sacred prostitutes who served in the temple of Ishtar would go into slavery with their mistress. Meier notes that the Hebrew term for “carried away” carries with it the meaning “to be led up for sacrifice.”53Such a meaning is certainly appropriate for a defeated nation whose inhabitants are being carried away to serve the victor’s God.
Nahum sought to portray the effects of God’s fighting against the city of Nineveh. The destruction would be complete. No thing and no one could withstand the onslaught of the attacking forces. The palace would collapse under the attack, and the leaders of Nineveh would go into exile in humiliation.
These words must have made a profound impression on the people of Jerusalem. For over a century the people of Israel and Judah suffered under the ruthlessness and oppression of Assyria. Now those leaders who most benefited from the cruel policies of exile, humiliation, and plunder would suffer exile, humiliation, and plunder.
47Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 60) says the first word of the sentence “has given rise to a host of interpretations, but none of them is convincing.”
NIV New International Version
48Armerding (“Habakkuk,” 7:477) shows linguistic parallels strongly supporting NIV translation, but Longman (“Nahum,” 806) says this involves an extension of meaning of the verb and is “speculative” and “awkward.” To take it as the name of the Assyrian queen is an option that Longman says has been “properly ridiculed” by G. R. Driver, “Farewell to Queen Huzzab [Nah 2:8]!”JTS16 (1964), 296–98, and by H. W. F. Saggs, “Nahum and the Fall of Nineveh,”JTS20 (1969): 220–25. Longman uses background studies of actions accompanying military defeat to defend the “consensus” that has grown that sees the image of a statue of a defeated goddess being stripped, desecrated, and taken away to the enemy’s temple, followed by devotees beating their breasts in mourning. Ayodhmust be added to the Hebrew text to get the wordהבצי, “beauty,” for the image of the goddess. How such a proposal is any less awkward and speculative than the NIV text may be questioned. Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 60) says no attempt to read this as “beauty,” or “gazelle,” or “the lizard” “seems very convincing.” So he favors an emended text with no textual support, relying on a word found only in Akk.:העתלּה(hāʿătallâ), cognate with Akk.etelletu, “princess.”
49Robertson argues: “The context in no way prepares for the mention of an otherwise unknown Assyrian queen” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 91). He prefers the verbal interpretation, translating, “It is settled.” Roberts agrees the queen interpretation “is a relatively late proposal, and there is no historical or inscriptional basis for it” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 60).
50The problem arises with the Hb. wordוְהֻצַּב, found only here in the Hebrew Bible. Maier (The Book of Nahum, 256) gives up: “It seems impossible to establish its meaning precisely and definitely,” but then he chooses Huzzab, the Assyrian queen. He lists twelve proposed solutions to the problem and then decides the Hebrew term is written defectively without the finalyodhand means “gazelle,” an image of beauty for Israel and thus a poetic reference to the Assyrian queen or to the city (pp. 259–63). Without other references such words are only tenuously translated. The NIV follows the Hb. text, where the word could be translated as ahophalperfect meaning “it is fixed” or “it is decreed” (BDB, 662). Other translations take the word as a proper name, “Huzzab” (see KJV and RSV), which referred to the queen of Assyria or to the statue of the goddess Ishtar (for a discussion of the problems of translations see Clark and Hatton,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 32–33). G. R. Driver surveyed the various options and based on Greek and Aramaic vocabulary translated the verse to read “the [captive] train goes into exile, they and their slave-girls are carried away” (“Farewell to Queen Huzzab!”JTS15 [1964]: 296–98). Watts sees here something from the temple, perhaps the idol’s pedestal (“Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah,” 113). Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 69–70) says the solutions follow three patterns: (1) noun meaning “beauty,” or “lady,” or “mistress,” referring either to the city of Nineveh or to the statue of the goddess Ishtar; (2) verb meaning “decreed” or “dissolved”; (3) some emendation of the text. Patterson follows NASB in seeing the word as a passive verb meaning “dissolved or crumbled,” but he then attaches it to v. 6: “the palace collapses and crumbles.”
NIV New International Version
51“Be exiled” (NIV) represents Hb.גּלּתה, literally, she was stripped. Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 70) wants to repoint the Hebrew text and read “her exiles, or her captives,” relating it to 3:10 and providing meaning to 2:7 once he has taken the opening word of the Hebrew text and attached it to the previous verse.
52Women beating on their breasts is a common rite of lamentation in the ancient Near East; see S. N. Kramer, “The Curse of Agade,”ANETS, 214. Coggins and Re’emi (Israel among the Nations, 42) point out that the normal meaning of the Hb. verb used here—נהג—is “to drive” and could refer to the delicate women of the court being herded like animals and driven off to captivity.
53Maier,The Book of Nahum, 262.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 206–208.
nfor never again shall the worthless pass through you;
he is utterly cut off.
x[Isa. 10:7]
y[Jer. 4:27]
zSee Mic. 7:4
aSee Joel 2:5
b[ver. 9; 2 Kgs. 19:22, 23]
cIsa. 10:33, 34; [Isa. 37:36]
dver. 9; [Isa. 9:1]
e[Isa. 9:4; 10:27; 14:25]
f[Ps. 109:13]
g[2 Kgs. 19:37]
h[Isa. 30:33]; See Ezek. 32:21–23
i[ch. 3:6]
2Ch 2:1 in Hebrew
jSee Isa. 52:7
k[Rom. 10:15]
l[Isa. 30:29]
mSee Num. 30:2
n[ver. 12]; See Joel 3:17
The Holy Bible: English Standard Version(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 나 1:9–15.
9◎너희는 여호와께 대하여 무엇을 꾀하느냐 그가 온전히 멸하시리니 재난이 다시 일어나지 아니하리라
10가시덤불 같이 엉크러졌고 술을 마신 것 같이 취한 그들은 마른 지푸라기 같이 모두 탈 것이거늘
11여호와께 악을 꾀하는 한 사람이 너희 중에서 나와서 사악한 것을 권하는도다
12여호와께서 이같이 말씀하시기를 그들이 비록 강하고 많을지라도 반드시 멸절을 당하리니 그가 없어지리라 내가 전에는 너를 괴롭혔으나 다시는 너를 괴롭히지 아니할 것이라
13이제 네게 지운 그의 멍에를 내가 깨뜨리고 네 결박을 끊으리라
14◎나 여호와가 네게 대하여 명령하였나니 네 이름이 다시는 전파되지 않을 것이라 내가 네 신들의 집에서 새긴 우상과 부은 우상을 멸절하며 네 무덤을 준비하리니 이는 네가 쓸모 없게 되었음이라
15◎볼지어다 아름다운 소식을 알리고 화평을 전하는 자의 발이 산 위에 있도다 유다야 네 절기를 지키고 네 서원을 갚을지어다 악인이 진멸되었으니 그가 다시는 네 가운데로 통행하지 아니하리로다 하시니라
The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 나 1:9–15.
앗수르가 번성하여 이스라엘을 압제하는 동안 이스라엘은 샬롬을 누릴 수 없었다. 앗수르가 부과하는 높은 조공과 수시로 자행되는 폭력, 우상을 숭배할 것을 요구받는 것으로 이들은 고통을 당했다. 그런데 이제 하나님께서 이들을 마른 지푸라기처럼 불태우시고 그들이 이스라엘에게 지웠던 멍에를 깨뜨리신다라고 약속하신다. 또한 아름다운 소식이 전해지고 화평, 샬롬이 임하게 될 것이다. 이렇게 하나님께서 이스라엘(유다)을 회복시키시는 이유는 이스라엘이 하나님의 백성으로 온전히 하나님을 예배하고 하나님나라의 백성으로 살아가도록 하기 위함이었다.
9절) 본문에서 너희는 이스라엘을 대적한 앗수르를 가리킨다. 지금 선지자는 우발적이 아니라 계힉적으로 하나님을 대적한 앗수르의 계략이 허튼 것임을 수사적인 질문으로 지적하고 있다. ‘너희가 어찌하여 여호와를 대적하여 음모를 꾸미느냐?’
하나님께서 계획하시고 이스라엘과 맺으신 언약은 대적들의 계략과 음모로 멈추거나 훼방을 받을 수 없다. 하나님께서는 이처럼 자신을 대적하는 대상들을 두 번 치실 필요도 없이 단번에 완전히 멸하실 것이다.
10절) 본 절은 하나님께서 대적들을 어떻게 멸하실지를 비유적인 언어로 서명하고 있다. 엉크러진 가시덤불과 술취한 자들이 마른 지푸라기처럼 모두 타버릴 것이라고 말한다. 두가지 비유가 서로 어율려 보이지 않지만 문자 그대로 해석하면 ‘그들은 가시덤불처럼 엉켜지고 자신의 술에 취한자들 같을지라도 그들은 마른 검불처럼 타버릴 것이다’가 된다.
모닥불을 붙일 때 가장 좋은 것은 바로 잘 마른 지푸라기이다. 이 지푸라기들은 한 번 붙으면 걷잡을 수 없이 타들어가게 된다. 하나님을 대적한 이들에게 하나님께서 불을 붙이시면 멈출 수 없이 모두 타버리게 될 것이다.
11절) 하나님께서 앗수르에게 분노하시며 이들을 진멸시키시는 것은 악을 꾀하는 한 사람때문이다.
왜 하나님께서 아시리아에게 분노하시는가? 11 절은 이들에게서 파괴자가 나왔기 때문이라고 선언한다. 선지지는 누구를 뜻하는 것일까?‘악을꾀하는 자'(11 절)는 구약의 여러 곳에서 사용되는 표현이다. 제사장으로서 맡은 직분은 감당하지 않고 엉뚱한 일만 하던 엘리의 두 아들(삼상 2:12), 이세벨이 나봇을 살해하고 그의 포도원을 가로챘던 행위(왕하21:10)등을 묘사하는 데 사용되었다. 성경에서 이러한 일을 행하는 자는 매우 비열하고 부패한 자들이며 무엇보다도 앞으로 오실 메시아의 성품(사 9:6)과 선명하게 대조되는 경건치 못한 자들이다·
나훔 시대에 ‘악을 꾀하는 자’는 구체화되지 않은 아시리아 왕, 혹은 포악한 왕 산헤립 (705-681 BC)이라는 것이 학자들의 해석이다· 그는 701 년에 예루살렘으로 쳐틀어온 적이 있었다(cf. 사236-38; 왕하 18:13-19:37).그렇다면 선지지는 예루살렘에 대한 산헤립의 만행올 하나님을 향한 대적 행위로 간주하고 있는것이다.하나님의 백성의 원수가 하나님의 원수이다. 개인 혹은 집단이 자신들의 욕심을 채우기 위하여 다른 사람(민족)을 착취하고 고통을 가중시키는 것은 역사의 주인이신 하나님께 대적하는 행위이다. 비록 이 타이틀이 일차적으로는 산헤립에게 적용되지만, 넓게는 하나님을 대적하는 모든 나라의 지도자들을 의미한다· 나홈은 이 타이툴을 아시리아의 형태(formofAssyria)로나타난 육신회된 악에게 적용하고 있다.
- 1:11The prophet addressed the oppressor: “From you has gone out one devising evil.” The NIV again identifies the one devising evil as Nineveh, even though the Hebrew omits any such identification. Others interpret this to refer to the Assyrian king Sennacherib (705–681 b.c.), who moved against Jerusalem in 701 b.c. when Hezekiah reigned over Judah (2 Kgs 18:13–19:37).118
The prophet considered action against Jerusalem as against the Lord himself. Those who make themselves the enemies of God’s people become the enemies of the Lord. This is why our actions toward the needy and oppressed are so important. Selfish actions that take advantage of the weak are a direct attack on the Lord of history. When we devise wicked schemes because it is in our power to do so, we oppose God himself.
The words translated “counsels wickedness” are found in several places in the Old Testament. As Patterson notes: “ ‘One who counsels wickedness’ stands in stark contrast to the coming Messiah, who will be a ‘wonder of a counselor’ (Isa 9:6).”119In some places the KJV transliterates the word for “wickedness”(bĕlîyāʿal)as “Belial.” The sons of Eli were “sons of Belial,” a phrase emphasizing their wickedness or worthlessness (1 Sam 2:12). Two “sons of Belial” carried out Jezebel’s wicked plan to murder Naboth and to defraud him of his vineyard (2 Kgs 21:10). Later the phrase came to be associated with the wickedness of Satan (2 Cor 6:15).120“The context in Scripture for the usage of the term points consistently to a person who is depraved, despicable.”121Usually this is taken as a reference to Sennacherib,122but Robertson is correct in seeing Nahum’s usage as broader: “All those wicked kings and leaders of the enemies of God’s people who have come forth from Assyria manifest the characteristics of that brutal figure.”123As Achtemeier says, “It certainly is the title which Nahum gives to evil incarnate in the form of Assyria.”124
NIV New International Version
118Longman sees the participial phrases as referring to “you” and the “he” to God, thus speaking “of God’s departure from the sinful city of Nineveh” (“Nahum,” 2:797).
119Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 47. The same Hebrew participle for “counseling, counselor” appears in both passages—יֹעֵץ.
KJV King James Version
120R. L. Smith notes thatבליעלhas recently been taken as a proper name for Belial, a demon comparable to Satan in Christian teaching (Micah–Malachi, 76). Roberts warns that “there is no clear evidence for this usage (of Belial as a proper name) in the OT” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 47–48). Smith insists that Belial suggests that “the human enemy, whoever he was, represented the Assyrian goddess.”
121Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 74, who points to Deut 13:13; Judg 19:22; 20:13; 1 Sam 2:12ff.; 15:17; 2 Sam 20:1; 1 Kgs 21:10, 13; 2 Chr 13:7; Ps 41:8–9. P. D. Wegner says the term “generally refers to a person who has become so wicked and corrupt that he/she is a detriment to society” (“בלה,”NIDOTTE1:662). Belial (or Beliar) is used as a proper name in intertestamental literature:Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, Jubilees, Ascension of Isaiah, Sybilline Oracles, and some Qumran documents.
122See Maier’s detailed application of the verses to Sennacherib’s career (The Book of Nahum, 196–97).
123Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 75. Heflin sees Belial as “a demonic representative of Ishtar/Nineveh plotting evil against the Lord” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 106).
124Achtemeier,Nahum–Malachi, 16.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 182–183.
12-13절) 나훔 선지자는 앗수르에 대한 심판을 멈추고 유다에 대해서 말씀하신다.
첫째 그들이 비록 강하고 많을 지라도 반드시 멸절을 당하리니 그가 없어질 것이다. 여기서 그들은 이스라엘을 괴롭히던 앗수르를 말한다. 본문에 없어지리라라는 표현은 ‘아바르’로 점차 사라지다라는 의미이다. 이 표현은 앞서 8절에서 ‘범람하는’ 물을 묘사하는데 사용되었다. 이 단어는 출애굽 당시 하나님께서 죽음을 통하여 애굽 사람들을 지나가실 때 사용된 것으로 유월절의 유래를 연상시킨다.
- “Pass away” reflects the same Hebrew root as the second word in v. 8, translated by NIV there as “overwhelming” but noted as a technical term for God’s saving deeds in causing Israel to pass over the sea and the river. Here the verb is singular, whereas the previous verb is plural.135Maier interprets this as referring to the wicked counselor or Belial of v. 11.136Robertson, in continuity with the salvation history association of the term, sees God as the subject of “pass over.” “In the very way in which he ‘passed over’ in the land of Egypt, so now again he through his agent the death angel shall smite Assyria.”137
NIV New International Version
135Patterson sees this as intentional, “a change in emphasis from the cutting off of the individual soldiers/units to the resultant demise of the entire army” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 48–49).
136Maier,The Book of Nahum, 206, but he then argues that thewawintroducing the next line should be redivided and placed on the precedingעבר, making the verb plural rather than singular. Roberts gives reasons for redividing the Hebrew to makeעברplural (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 47).
137Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 77.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 185.
둘째 하나님께서 전에는 너를(이스라엘) 괴롭혔으나 다시는 너를 괴롭히지 않으실 것이다. 선지자는 이전에 범죄하는 이스라엘을 치시기 위해서 이방, 앗수르를 사용하셔서 징계하셨지만 이제는 그 징계가 끝날 것을 선언하신다. 하나님께서는 필요에 따라서 악을 사용하여 그의 백성을 연단하기도 하신다. 하지만 하나님께서 악을, 악인을 사용하셨다고 해도 결코 악의 행위가 정당화되는 것은 아니다. 하나님께서는 악을 도구로 사용하시지만 그들의 만행과 비도덕적인 행위에 대해서는 분명히 책임을 물으신다.
셋째 하나님께서는 이스라엘에게 지운 앗수르의 멍에를 깨뜨리고 그 결박을 끊으실 것이다라고 말씀하신다. 멍에는 소와 같은 짐승의 목에 채워지는 것이며, 결박(사슬)은 멍에를 매는 가죽 줄이다. 이제 하나님께서 이스라엘을 억압하고 구속하던 앗수르의 멍에와 결박을 끊으실 것이다.
- 1:13His yokerefers to the burdensome rule of the Assyrian monarchs (cf. v. 11) over Judah. About 734/733 b.c., during the reign of Ahaz (2 Kings 16:7–8), the southern kingdom had become a vassal state of Assyria. This involved paying heavy tribute to the Assyrians (cf. 2 Kings 18:13–16) and other oppressive measures. When Judah revolted under Hezekiah, the Assyrians in 701 b.c. devastated the land (2 Kings 18:13; Isa. 7:18–25; 8:5–8) and took away many people and much plunder.break … burst. The vassalage of Judah lasted until the reign of Josiah (640–609 b.c.), when Assyria began to decline rapidly and finally ceased to be a nation (see Introduction: Date).
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1713.
14절) 이제 앗수르의 운명에 대해서 이렇게 선포하신다.
첫번째 네 이름이 다시는 전파되지 않을 것이고 둘째 네 신들의 집에서 새긴 우상과 부은 우상을 멸절할 것이며 셋째 네 무덤을 준비할 것이다라고 말한다. 결국 쓸모없게 될 것이다.
이름이 다시는 전파되지 않다는 것은 자신의 이름을 이어갈 후손이 없다는 것이다. 우상이 멸절될 것이라는 것은 이스라엘을 압제하던 이들의 종교가 망하게 될 것이라는 것이다. 지배국은 피지배국에 자신들의 종교를 강요해왔다. 하지만 이들이 쇠퇴하며 그들이 섬기던 종교, 우상이 멸절되어 모든 종교행위가 멈추게 될 것이다. 무덤을 준비한다는 것은 죽음이 임할 것을 선언하는 것이다.
결국 앗수르의 운명은 그들이 남을 억압하고 경멸한 만큼 당하게 될 것이다. 하나님께서는 하나님의 백성을 괴롭히고 멸시한 이들을 기억하시고 심은대로 거두게 하신다.
- 1:14The Termination of Vile, Idolatrous Nineveh.Youis masculine singular in Hebrew. Nahum suddenly switches to directly addressing the Assyrian king(s) (see v. 11): the Assyrian monarchy would come to a decisive end. This implies the total conquest of Assyria and the irreversible fall of Nineveh.the house of your gods I will cut off. Complete defeat of the Assyrian ruler would also be marked by the desecration of his temple and the destruction or removal of his idols, which represented the gods who he believed gave him power, wealth, and descendants. Archaeologists have noted the complete destruction that Nineveh’s temples underwent.
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1713.
15절) 본문은 ‘볼지어다’라는 단어로 시작된다. 산위의 유다에게 아름다운 소식과 화평을 전하는 이가 도착했다. 이 ‘히네’라는 표현은 심판으로부터 구원으로의 급격한 전환을 예고한다.
이사야 52:7
7좋은 소식을 전하며 평화를 공포하며 복된 좋은 소식을 가져오며 구원을 공포하며 시온을 향하여 이르기를 네 하나님이 통치하신다 하는 자의 산을 넘는 발이 어찌 그리 아름다운가
많은 이들이 이 구절이 나훔의 핵심 구절이라고 말한다. 하나님이 행하시는 영적인 전쟁의 승리의 소식을 전하는 전령의 이미지를 보여준다.
본문의 표현은 이사야 선지자가 선포했던 내용과 흡사하다. 전령이 전하는 소식은 아름다운 소식, 곧 화평(샬롬)이다. 샬롬은 무엇보다 모든 속박에서 자유하게 되었다는 의미로, 당시로는 앗수르의 억압과 핍박으로부터, 지금으로 보자면 사탄의 속박에서 완전한 자유를 누릴 수 있는 소식이 임한 것이다. 바로 이것이 복음이다. 복음은 샬롬을 가져온다. 나훔은 주의 백성에게 샬롬을 전하는 자의 발을 보라고 말한다.
하나님께서 이렇게 샬롬을 주신 이유는 그 자유를 가지고 절기를 지키고 네 서원을 갚는데 사용하라고 말씀하신다. 하나님께서 앗수르로부터 이스라엘을 구원하신 목적은 바로 그들이 여호와 하나님을 마음껏 섬기고 예배할 수 있도록 하신 것이다.
하나님께서 우리의 대적들을 진멸하시고 우리를 보호하시면 자유를, 화평을 주시는 이유는 하나님을 온전히 경배하고, 하나님과 맺은 언약을 제대로 이행하도록 하기 위함이다.
히브리어 성경은 본문 1장 15절을 2장 1절로 취급한다.
니느웨의 압제로부터 구원의 기쁜 소식을 전하는 것은 죄와 사망으로부터 구원의 기쁜 소식을 전하는 것을 가리킨다.
- 1:15Peace and Deliverance for Judah.This verse concludes the second major portion of the book (vv. 9–15). Nahum returns to addressing Judah. What he has foretold with regard to Nineveh, the Assyrian monarchy, and the Assyrians he now considers as good as accomplished.upon the mountains. The imagery is that of a messenger bearing thegood newsof the fall and devastation of Nineveh. The people first catch sight of him running along the Judean mountains (cf. Isa. 52:7).peace. Judah does not have to be afraid of any more military action and oppression coming from Assyria (on peace in the OT and NT, cf. note on John 14:27).Keep your feasts. These festivals would remind the people of the Lord’s past acts of deliverance and the future hope of the coming Messiah. At the feasts they would also, as a nation, worship the Lord and give him proper thanks and praise.fulfill your vows. Some in Judah voluntarily made vows to the Lord to give him thank offerings.the worthless. I.e., the Assyrians (cf. Nah. 1:11).
Crossway Bibles,The ESV Study Bible(Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1714.
- 1:15“In many ways Nahum 1:15 is the book’s key verse.”165The victory announcement comes at last. Having told of the Lord’s goodness and his awesome power, Nahum then told of the Lord’s ultimate deliverance of the people of Judah. The messenger returns from battle to inform God’s people that the Divine Warrior is victorious. Life as usual can return, but not really life as usual—rather, life as usual was supposed to be under God.
The time period of Nahum’s prophecy is crucial to the interpretation of the verse. In one sense the meaning is universal. God works. He is the Lord of history who delivers the oppressed and judges the oppressor. In that sense the message of Nahum is timeless. Isaiah 52:7 uses the first part of the verse to announce the return of the captive exiles from Babylon to Jerusalem.166For “one who brings good news” the ancient Greek translation (Septuagint) used a participle fromeuangelizō, from which English derived “evangelist.” Christians understand the powerful spiritual message involved in this passage. God’s work has been to proclaim peace(šālōm)to all people of all ages. In the Messianic Age, God proclaims the greatest message of peace, that there is the possibility of peace in the restless human spirit.
At the same time the timing of Nahum’s message determines the way the book is understood. Did Nahum proclaim this when the word of Nineveh’s fall reached the city of Jerusalem? Shortly after the fall of Nineveh, the message would have gone out to the nations that the end of Assyria’s dominance was in sight. If this is the case, then shortly before or after Nineveh’s fall in 612 b.c. Nahum preached his words of joy to the people.
Would an earlier date be a better alternative? If Nahum’s message fits better into an earlier time when Assyria continued to dominate the region, then the death of Ashurbanipal in 627 b.c. might have been the occasion for Nahum’s joy.167Or Nahum may have readied the people for the good news that would soon come at some unspecified time in the future.
The verse begins with a Hebrew particlehinnê, “look.” Patterson sees this as calling attention “to key descriptive statements.… Here it introduces the close of the first portion of the book.”168Longman says, “It signals a sudden transition from judgment to salvation.”169Nahum used the entire verse to announce the good news of God’s work.170The language here describes “God’s solemn entry into his sanctuary, an ancient hymnic motif that was clearly of direct relevance to a time of historical threat.”171In Hebrew thinking, the feet emphasized the messenger. In the Isaiah passage (52:7) the prophet described the feet as lovely, thus indicating the joy and happiness the messenger brought. The mountains surrounded Jerusalem. Anyone bringing a message would necessarily travel over the mountains to deliver the good news. The messenger brought good tidings and proclaimed peace. These are parallel statements that essentially mean the same.172
“The Hebrew word for ‘peace’ is one of the most remarkable words in that ancient biblical language. Its meaning is much more profound than simply the cessation of war. It refers to wholeness, completeness, total well-being.”173In most cases peace means a quality of life. Peace is that which you wish for a bride and groom on their wedding day. When you offer “all the good things of life” to a young couple, you are offering the Hebrew idea ofshalom. In the present verse peace is the cessation of the oppressor. Judah had been at peace for a long time. That peace was the problem rather than the solution. Peace had been imposed by the Assyrians. As long as Judah paid its tribute, swore allegiance to the king of Assyria, and did not instigate rebellion (as would be the case with the removal of Assyrian images from the temple in Jerusalem), Judah could live in peace. God offered something far more meaningful to the people of Judah. He promised to bring peace with justice. God’s peace meant that a wholeness would be returned to the land.
But how would Jerusalem respond to this messenger and the unexpected news of victory over invincible Assyria? The messenger’s announcement leaves the decision in the people’s hands. Can they possibly believe the news they so desperately want to hear, news that so long has remained in the realm of daydreams? Paul took up the message in Rom 10:14–15, probably using Isaiah’s version. He reminded us of the heart of the gospel: “God’s people are not charged with the responsibility of accomplishing their own deliverance. Instead, they are informed they mustbelievewhat has been reported to them as an act of God on their behalf.”174
“As Nineveh’s flourishing religion was to be buried, so the worship of oppressed Judah would be resurrected.”175Nahum called Israel to celebration, a celebration based on the belief that the announced victory had actually occurred. Celebration was not a wild victory party. Celebration was a return to God’s house to keep God’s worship festivals in the way God commanded. “Neglect of the festivals and the vows was the same as neglecting Yahweh.”176In this way “they shall respond to redemption by renewed consecration to the Lord. This celebration shall have no hangovers or sober regrets.”177
Keeping their feasts may indicate that the people could now return to the practice of their religion. “Judah now had religious freedom, and Nahum wanted that freedom exercised responsibly.”178Fulfilling their vows meant that their pleas for mercy had been heard. As Maier says, “The deliverance comes from God; He must be thanked.”179Why is it easier to beg for mercy than to offer sincere thanksgiving to God? In every age the people of God must be reminded to “remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth” (Deut 8:18).
God promised the cessation of hostility and the restoration of autonomy to the people of Judah. No more would the wicked invade the people of Judah. They would be completely cut off, a word of assurance that Judah’s subservience to Assyria would soon end. Literally, the Hebrew reads, “For not again still to pass over you Belial.180“The tyrannical tool of Satan situated on Assyria’s throne never shall be seen again. His overthrow is absolutely permanent.”181Yes, Assyria did fall, and Assyria did not trouble Judah again.
The verse is a powerful reminder of the goodness of God in all ages. The Christian cannot help but be reminded of the beauty of the messenger who proclaims the newness of life in Christ. The message had an urgency about it because it proclaimed the timeless message of peace and good tidings. Yet the message referred to historical events that were fulfilled soon after the message of Nahum.
165Heflin,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 49.
166Scholars debate how the two prophets used the same material. Did one borrow from the other, or did each take the material from a common source? Coggins and Re’emi(Israel among the Nations)suggest that “speculation whether one prophetic collection may have borrowed from the other is not very profitable, and such a purely mechanical relation in any case seems inherently unlikely. Rather it is more probable that there was a stock of oracular material which might be used as appropriate in the particular circumstances of each collection.”
167Armerding points out that the reigns of Amon and Manasseh involved suppression of true Israelite religion. “This provides further evidence for dating Nahum’s prophecy toward the middle of the seventh century” (“Habakkuk,” 7:469).
168Patterson,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 51.
169Longman, “Nahum,” 800.
170Good news often includes peace (Isa 52:7; Luke 2:10, 14; Acts 10:36).
171Coggins and Re’emi,Israel among the Nations, 33.
172In the Hebrew “one who brings good news, who proclaims peace” isמְבַשֵּׂר֙ מַשְׁמִ֣יעַ שָׁל֔וֹם. Both verbs are participles, indicating continuous action.מְבַשֵּׂרispielfromבשׂר, “bring good news, herald good tidings”;מַשְׁמִ֣יעַishiphilfromשׁמע, “hear,” and so “cause to hear.”
173Heflin,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 49.
174Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 83.
175Armerding, “Habakkuk,” 7:469.
176Longman, “Nahum,” 2:800.
177Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 84–85.
178Heflin,Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 50.
179Maier,The Book of Nahum, 218.
180Hebrew rootעבר, which has appeared in vv. 7, 12 to recall God’s saving acts: the death angel passing over, the people passing over the Red Sea and the Jordan River. On Belial see the comments and notes on v. 11.
181Robertson,Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 85.
Kenneth L. Barker,Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 190–193.
