하나님나라를 꿈꾸며(Kingdom of God)

1 aAn oracle concerning bNineveh. The book of the vision of Nahum of Elkosh.

God’s Wrath Against Nineveh

2  cThe Lord is a jealous and avenging God;

the Lord is avenging and wrathful;

dthe Lord takes vengeance on his adversaries

and ekeeps wrath for his enemies.

3  fThe Lord is slow to anger and ggreat in power,

and hthe Lord will by no means clear the guilty.

iHis way is in whirlwind and storm,

and the clouds are the dust of his feet.

4  jHe rebukes the sea and makes it dry;

he dries up all the rivers;

kBashan and lCarmel wither;

the bloom of kLebanon withers.

5  mThe mountains quake before him;

nthe hills melt;

the earth heaves before him,

othe world and all who dwell in it.

6  pWho can stand before his indignation?

Who can endure the heat of his anger?

His wrath qis poured out like fire,

and rthe rocks are broken into pieces by him.

7  sThe Lord is good,

ta stronghold in the day of trouble;

uhe knows those who take refuge in him.

8  But vwith an overflowing flood

he will make a complete end of the adversaries,1

and wwill pursue his enemies into darkness.

a See Isa. 13:1

b ch. 2:8; 3:7; See Jonah 1:2

c See Ex. 20:5

d [Ps. 92:9]

e [Ps. 103:9]

f See Ex. 34:6

g Job 9:4; Ps. 147:5

h See Ex. 34:7

i [Ps. 97:2]; See Ps. 18:9–13

j Ps. 106:9; [Isa. 50:2]

k Isa. 33:9

l See Josh. 19:26

k Isa. 33:9

m [Jer. 4:24; Hab. 3:6]

n Amos 9:13

o Ps. 98:7

p [Mal. 3:2]

q 2 Chr. 34:21; [Ps. 79:6]

r Ezek. 38:20

s Jer. 33:11; See Ps. 100:5

t Ps. 46:1; Isa. 25:4

u Ps. 1:6; John 10:14, 27; 1 Cor. 8:3; 2 Tim. 2:19

v [Isa. 30:28]

1 Hebrew of her place

w Isa. 8:22

 The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016), 나 1.

 

1 니느웨에 대한 경고 곧 엘고스 사람 나훔의 묵시의 글이라

니느웨에 대한 여호와의 진노

2 ◎여호와는 질투하시며 보복하시는 하나님이시니라 여호와는 보복하시며 진노하시되 자기를 거스르는 자에게 여호와는 보복하시며 자기를 대적하는 자에게 진노를 품으시며

3 여호와는 노하기를 더디하시며 권능이 크시며 벌 받을 자를 결코 내버려두지 아니하시느니라 여호와의 길은 회오리바람과 광풍에 있고 구름은 그의 발의 티끌이로다

4 그는 바다를 꾸짖어 그것을 말리시며 모든 강을 말리시나니 바산과 갈멜이 쇠하며 레바논의 꽃이 시드는도다

5 그로 말미암아 산들이 진동하며 작은 산들이 녹고 그 앞에서는 땅 곧 세계와 그 가운데에 있는 모든 것들이 솟아오르는도다

6 누가 능히 그의 분노 앞에 서며 누가 능히 그의 진노를 감당하랴 그의 진노가 불처럼 쏟아지니 그로 말미암아 바위들이 깨지는도다

7 여호와는 선하시며 환난 날에 산성이시라 그는 자기에게 피하는 자들을 아시느니라

8 그가 범람하는 물로 그 곳을 진멸하시고 자기 대적들을 흑암으로 쫓아내시리라

 The Holy Bible: New Korean Revised Version, electronic ed. (South Korea, n.d.), 나 1.

 

 

1절) 니느웨에 대한 경고, 엘고스 사람 나훔의 묵시의 글이다. 

본절은 이 선지서의 저자가 누구인지, 그리고 이 책의 기록 목적이 무엇인지를 분명하게 밝힌다.

 

나훔은 ‘하나님께서 위로하다’라는 뜻으로 느헤미야와 같은 단어에서 파생된 것으로 보인다. 주전 7세기 말 고대 근동의 군주가 앗수르에서 바벨론으로 바뀌는 혼동의 시점에 선지자 나훔은 자신의 신상정보를 많이 남기지 않았다. 

엘고스가 어디인지는 분명하지 않다. 

 

대부분의 선지서들이 첫장 첫절에서 이렇게 저자와 목적을 언급하는데 본절은 특이하게 경고와 묵시라는 표현이 이중적으로 사용되었다. 

경고는 oracle인데 히브리어로 ‘마싸’이고, 묵시는 vision으로 ‘하존’이라는 표현이 사용되었다. 

-  oracle (Hb. massa’) denotes a prophetic utterance or proclamation (see note on Hab. 1:1), and vision (Hb. khazon) indicates how God communicated the contents of the book to Nahum. The name Nineveh occurs again only in Nah. 2:8 and 3:7.

 Crossway Bibles, The ESV Study Bible (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Bibles, 2008), 1712.

 

-  Nahum’s message is called a maśśāʾ, usually translated “burden” or “oracle.”3 The term can refer to wisdom sayings (Prov 30:1; 31:1) but usually is found in prophetic material, referring to a divine word regarding the foreign nations as it does in this instance. Isaiah used the term repeatedly in the section of his book concerning the foreign nations (Isa 13:1; 14:28; 15:1; 17:1; 19:1; 21:1, 11, 13; 23:1; 30:6). Habakkuk’s message bore the same terminology, though he spoke about the destruction of the tyrant rather than directly to the foreign nation (Hab 1:1; cp. Jer 23:33; Ezek 12:10). The prophetic speech may be directed against individuals (2 Kgs 9:25; Isa 22:1; 2 Chr 24:27). The word may also be used for oracles of salvation (Zech 9:1; 12:1; Mal 1:1). The basic meaning of the term is thus “oracle” or “prophetic saying”4 and not “burden,”5 but the underlying connotation of “burden” may well have commended itself to any native speaker of Hebrew.6

Of all the prophetic works only Nahum is described as a “book” in the title verse.7 As mentioned in the Introduction, this suggests that rather than originating as sermons preached by the prophet, this work may have been produced initially as literature. This most likely took the form of a scroll that may have been circulated as an underground pamphlet during times of Assyrian persecution.8

Nahum’s message came to him by means of a “vision.” That is, “the prophet perceived God’s revelation with the mind’s eye.”9 “A vision is an event through which the Lord spoke to a prophet.… On the one hand, it refers to the thing seen, the vision or the appearance of the vision (Dan 7:1). On the other hand, it shows the effect on the seer: He is encouraged, chosen, shocked, pardoned, et cetera. Not a visual image but a word from God is received.… The prophetic vision primarily involved a revelation of God and his word, and only then a visual impact: God let it be known what he wanted or what he was going to do and showed it to someone whom he had chosen for this purpose.”10 Watts says, “In a vision the usual restrictions of reason, time and space recede and the prophet is seized by a compulsion to see and speak in a heightened consciousness what he recognizes to be from God. The excellent poetic form of the book was understood to be a direct result of ‘inspiration.’ ”11 This word ḥazôn is also found in the opening verse of Isaiah and Obadiah (see also Hab 2:2). We are not told how the vision occurred. The prophets described various ways the word of the Lord came to them. The opening verses of Amos and Micah say the prophet “saw” it, using the related verb hāzâ.

“This vb. in the context of prophetic perception refers to a revelation of the divine word, usually at night during a deep sleep and sometimes associated with emotional agitations. Prophetic seeing assumes the character of a vision (Ezek 12:27; 13:16).… Visual manifestation, however, played, at most, a minor role. The emphasis in the revelatory vision was on the revelation of the divine word, which endowed the prophet with special knowledge of divine things, which he had to proclaim (Isa 1:1; 2:1; 13:1; Amos 1:1; Mic 1:1; Hab 1:1).”12

The point is that the message was revealed to them by the Lord and was no human invention or imagination (cf. Jer 14:14; 23:16).13 “This prophetic material is not presented as the product of an ecstatic dervish whose mind swirled with frenzied irrationalities. His vision could be laid out as an objective, rational piece of literature with a unified theme embodying elaborate poetic structures.”14

3 The meanings come from two usages of the Hb. נשׂא, “to lift, raise.” To raise one’s voice gives rise to the meaning “pronouncement or oracle.” To lift a load suggests “burden.” See HALOT 2:638–39 for the two meanings: “load, burden” in Exod 23:5; 2 Kgs 5:17; Isa 22:25; “pronouncement” in 2 Kgs 9:25; Lam 2:14; Prov 30:1. H. P. Müller gives the arguments and literature for one or two sources for this term (TWAT 5:20–21). Some suggest the translation “oracle” is too general. J. A. Soggin prefers “charge” (Introduction to the Old Testament [Louisville: Westminster/John Knox, 1989], 303, 325). For a defense of “oracle” see R. D. Patterson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, WEC (Chicago: Moody, 1991), 19.

4 See W. Rudolph, Micha-Nahum-Habakuk-Zephanja, 148; J. D. W. Watts, “The Books of Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah,” in The Cambridge Bible Commentary on the New English Bible (Cambridge: University Press, 1975), 98; Patterson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 19–20; D. W. Baker, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, TOTC (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1988), 21.

5 F. Stolz (“נשׂא nśʾ to lift, bear,” TLOT 2:773–74), O. P. Robertson (The Books of Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, NICOT [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990], 55), and W. A. Maier (The Book of Nahum: A Commentary [St. Louis: Concordia, 1959], 145–47) argue for “burden” following P. A. H. de Boer (OTS 5 [1948]: 197–214) and J. N. B. Heflin (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, BSC [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985], 33–34). Despite Jeremiah’s play on the word (Jer 23:33–38), the term does not automatically designate a prophecy as coming from a false cultic prophet; see Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 40.

6 R. J. Coggins and S. P. Re’emi speak of the “implicit idea of judgment” (Israel among the Nations, ITC [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985], 16).

7 Watts (“Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah,” 100) sees the original use of the written “book” as that of a sermon text intended to be preached or a play script. Heflin contends that “committing Nahum’s prophecy to writing was merely another step in its eventual placement in the Old Testament canon. It was obviously a step taken for all of the canonical prophetic books, despite the omission of the precise word from their titles” (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 35–36).

8 C. F. Keil, “Nahum,” in The Twelve Minor Prophets 2, trans. J. Martin (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1949), 9; T. Longman III, “Nahum,” in The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary, ed. T. E. McComiskey (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1993), 786. Rudolph (Micha-Nahum-Habakuk-Zephanja, 150) appears to follow the commentary of A. H. Edelkoort that Nahum’s book was an underground “Flugschrift” or pamphlet of those in flight, passed from hand to hand because Manasseh’s support of Assyria made any word against Assyria dangerous (Nahum, Habakuk Zephanja [Amsterdam: 1937], 39–45). E. Achtemeier (Nahum–Malachi, INT [Atlanta: John Knox, 1986], 7), Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 21); Maier (The Book of Nahum, 144), Heflin (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 35–36), and Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 41) see no reason to assume that “book” means the material was originally written and not spoken. Patterson writes: “The use of the term may simply suggest that Nahum’s burdensome vision, whether delivered orally or not, has now under divine inspiration been committed to a permanent record that all may read (cf. Hab. 2:2).”

9 Heflin, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 36.

10 J. G. McConville, “חזה,” NIDOTTE 2:58–59. For the word content of vision he refers to 1 Sam 3:1; Ps 89:19. People could seek a vision (Ezek 7:26), but God could prevent prophets from having visions (Lam 2:9; Mic 3:6), and false prophets might have false visions (Jer 14:14; 23:16). Dreams and theophanies are distinct from visions, often related to the nighttime. A. Jepsen notes that of 115 occurrences of the root chazah, eighty-six are tied to prophecy (TWAT 2:824–25). He agrees that the root refers to word reception and not images as seen in Gen 15:1; 2 Sam 7:4, 17; Job 4:13; 33:14–16; Hos 12:11; Jer 14:14; 23:16; Ezek 12:23. This is true in what may be the oldest reference, Num 24:3–4, 14–15. Jepsen summarizes his conclusions: It signifies a revelation of God’s word received at night during a deep sleep and frequently associated with agitated circumstances. In this visual appearances play no or at best a small role (p. 827).

11 Watts, “Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah,” 100.

12 McConville (NIDOTTE 2:58), who also notes that a false prophet could have a vision (Zech 10:2; Isa 30:10; Lam 2:14; Ezek 13:6–9, 23; 21:32; 22:28). The nighttime reception of the vision that might lead one to think of dreams or images also apparently referred to reception of God’s word as Jepsen (TWAT 2:826) shows, referring to Job 4:12–16; Mic 3:6; 1 Sam 7:4, 17; Gen 15:1; Job 20:8; 33:15; Isa 29:10. Roberts notes that though it originally designated the manner of reception of revelation, it may have come to mean little more than “prophecy” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 41).

13 See Patterson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 19.

14 Robertson, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 55.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 160–162.

 

2-3절) 여호와는 질투하시며 보복하시는 하나님이시다. 여호와는 보복하시며 진노하시되 자기를 거스르는 자에게 여호와는 보복하시며 자기를 대적하는 자에게 진노를 품으시며, 여호와는 노하기를 더디하시며 권능이 크시며 벌받을 자를 결코 내버려두지 않으신다. 

 

이절 본문속에서는 보복하다라는 표현이 세번이나 반복되어서 사용된다. 여호와 하나님께서 이렇게 질투하시고 진노하시며 보복하시는 이유는 바로 하나님의 자리를 넘보는 이들에 대한 분노와 이스라엘에 대한 시기때문이다. 시내산에서 이스라엘은 하나님과 결혼했다. 남편되신 여호와께서는 아내의 관심을 빼앗는 그 무엇도 용납하지 않으시는 것이다. 

이 보복하다라는 단어는 히브리어 ‘나캄’으로 원수를 갚다. 복수하다라는 의미로 사용되었다. 

본문에서 하나님의 두가지 성품이 대조적으로 등장한다. 하나님은 질투하시며 보복하시는 하나님이시면서 동시에 노하기를 더디하시며 권능이 크신 하나님이시다. 하나님이 진노하시는 것을 바로 사랑때문이다. 중요한 것은 질투와 진노가 누구를 향하느냐 하는 것이다. 이 두가지 성품을 다른 것이 아니다. 니느웨는 하나님의 백성을 핍박함으로 그들의 남편이신 여호와 하나님의 명예에 도전한다. 이에 자신의 백성들의 고난에 하나님께서 개입하셔서 그 가해자들에게 보복하시는 것이다. 이것은 하나님과 이스라엘 백성사이의 언약으로 인해서 작동한다. 이처럼 나훔이 선포하는 니느웨를 향한 하나님의 진노는 이스라엘에게는 소망의 메시지가 되는 것이다. 원수들의 핍박이 핍박당하는 자들을 구출하기 위한 트리거로 작동한다는 사실은 핍박당하는 자들에게는 큰 위로가 된다. 하나님께서는 당신의 사랑하시는 백성들이 애매히 당하는 고난을 외면하지 않으시고 그들이 부르짖을때 그들의 간구를 들으시고 그들을 핍박하는 자들을 내버려두지 않으시고 벌하실 것이다. 

 

2절에서는 하나님의 이름 ‘여호와’도 세 번 반복되어 사용된다. 2절 본문에서는 여호와라는 표현과 ‘바알’, ‘차르’라는 표현이 함께 사용되었다. 이는 선지자가 의도적으로 가나안의 다른 신들과 비교하여 여호와만이 참 신임을 선언하고 있는 것이다. 당시 유다는 앗수르의 핍박을 받으며 므낫세의 치하에서 바알을 비롯한 이방 신들을 섬기고 있었다. 이방의 우상에게 복을 비는 유다를 향해서 여호와가 참 하나님이시며 진노하시는 분이심을 선언하는 것이다. 

-  In Nahum’s day the fertility religions held significant influence in Judah. Worshiping the Canaanite gods or worshiping the Lord alongside the Canaanite gods remained a strong possibility. Both Zephaniah and Jeremiah, Nahum’s contemporaries, condemned the worship of the fertility gods. So Nahum used three names for the holy God.36 “El,” used in place of the normal generic divine designation Elohim, was the ancient Father of the gods in Canaanite religion. “Baal,” a name associated with the Canaanite fertility gods, was often used for the Lord and indicated the Lord’s power. The covenant name is Yahweh (The Lord), which alone appears after v. 2. El and Baal are found only in v. 2. “The juxtaposition of these three divine names in one line of poetry is surely a deliberate dramatic device.”37 Nahum is showing that Yahweh functions in any role that someone might be tempted to attribute to one of the Canaanite gods or to any other god.38 God is jealous and avenges himself against anyone who would occupy his place as God. The fertility gods, whose worshipers ascribed to them the power of rain and storm, remained powerless while the Lord is great in power.

“Vengeance describes the action that emerges from that jealousy,” which is “God’s attitude toward all rivals.”39 The Lord is a jealous God. Eichrodt went so far as to call jealousy “the basic element in the whole Old Testament idea of God.”40 God’s jealousy is “a statement about God’s self-respect; he will not be treated as merely one among many, nor will he allow his demands to be ignored; he is God, and he will be acknowledged as God or else.”41 “The image of God’s ‘jealousy’ is of his zealous will driving forward toward his goal of salvation for his earth.”42 Jealousy distinguishes God from all other gods, for he “is not silent or passive in matters of righteousness and truth.”43 In modern society jealousy connotes only an evil idea. One can hardly get away from the image of a crazed person whose jealousy takes the life of another person. The Lord is jealous in the sense that he demands an exclusive relationship, zealously protects that relationship, and desires the worship that belongs to him alone. He cannot be worshiped alongside any other.

36 Verse 2 can be translated literally, “El is a jealous and avenging Yahweh; / An avenging Yahweh and Baal of wrath. / An avenging Yahweh to his foes and preserving [wrath] to his enemies.” In this context Baal may bring to mind the Canaanite god, but its function in the sentence is as a common noun meaning “lord, master, or husband of.”

37 Coggins and Re’emi, Israel among the Nations, 21.

38 Patterson suggests that the use of Baal, the Canaanite storm god, may be a veiled reference to the Assyrian storm god Hadad (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 26).

39 Robertson, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 61. Longman notes that relationships with God and with a marriage partner are the only ones in which a person is bound by an exclusive tie and thus the only ones in which jealousy is considered proper (“Nahum,” 2:788). Patterson details the biblical use of marriage as an image of God’s relationship with his people (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 22–24).

40 W. Eichrodt, Theology of the Old Testament, trans. J. A. Baker (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1961), 210, n. 1. For further discussion of this see T. C. Butler, Joshua, WBC 7 (Waco: Word, 1983), 275.

41 Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 49.

42 Achtemeier, Nahum–Malachi, 8.

43 Maier, The Book of Nahum, 150.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 168–169.

 

하나님은 노하기를 더디하시는 분이시기에 그분이 노를 발하실 때는 지체없이 죄에서 돌이켜 회개해야 한다. 하나님께서 참을 만큼 참으시고 난 후에 심판하시기 때문에 지체해서는 심판의 재앙을 면할 수 없기 때문이다. 

 

우리는 여호와의 노하기를 더디하는 성품에 대해서 불만을 가질 수 있다. 악인들이 우리를 핍박할 때 하나님께서 절대 참지 마시고 즉각적으로 응징해주시기를 원하는 마음이 있다. 그래서 참으시는 하나님을 보면서 그분의 연약함, 무능함을 떠올리기 때문이다. 왜 정의의 하나님, 능력의 하나님이시면서 원수들의 포악을 방관하시냐고 질문할 수 있다. 하지만 하나님께서는 이 모든 것을 감수하시며 마지막까지 참으신다. 죄인들이 스스로 회개하고 돌아오기를 바라시는 것이다. 이처럼 하나님의 오래 참으심, 노하기를 더디하심은 하나님의 무능이 아니라 은혜인 것이다. 하나님께서 주의 백성들에게 무한하게 오래참으시는 것처럼 온세상 모든 사람들에게도 오래참으시는 것이다. 그렇기에 하나님의 심판과 보복이 더디다고 여겨질지라도 믿음이 흔들리지 말고 기다려야 한다. 

 

3절하-6절) 본 절은 여호와 하나님께서 온 세상 만물을 다스리시고 통치하시는 능력을 노래한다. 

여호와의 길은 회오리 바람과 광풍에 있고 구름은 그의 발의 티끌이다. 그분은 바다를 꾸짖어 그것을 말리시며, 모든 강을 말리시나니 바산과 갈멜이 쇠하며 레바논의 꽃이 시든다. 그분으로 말미암아 산들이 진동하고 작은 산들이 녹고 그 앞에서는 땅 곧 세계와 그 가운데 있는 모든 것들이 솟아 오른다. 누가 능히 그의 분노 앞에 서며 그의 진노를 감당할 수 있겠느냐? 그분의 진노가 불처럼 쏟아지니 그로 인해 바위들이 깨진다. 

 

본 절을 통해서 고대 사람들이 숭배하고 신으로 여겼던 것들, 회오리 바람과 광풍과 구름, 산들과 바위가 아무것도 아님을 말하고 있으며, 바알을 통해서 얻고자 했던 풍요로움도 하나님께서 꾸짖으시면 모두 쇠하여 없어질 것이라고 말하고 있다. 

바다를 꾸짖어 말리시는 사건은 출애굽의 홍해를 가르신 사건은 연상시킨다. 바다와 강은 하나님께서 창조하실 때 땅과 물을 나누기 위해서, 물을 담기 위해서 지으신 것이다. 하지만 하나님께서 말씀하시면 바다와 강은 말라버리게 될 것이다. 니느웨는 두 개의 큰 강(유프라테스와 티그리스)이 흐르고 도시 중심부로 코서 강이 흘렀다. 이것을 마르게 하신다면 이 강을 통해 었던 풍요로움이나 안전이 없어지게 될 것이다.

 

본문에서 바산과 갈멜과 레바논은 가나안의 가장 기름진 지역으로 가뭄의 영향을 잘 받지 않는 지역들이다. 하지만 하나님께서 진노를 발하시면 물이 마르게 되고 식물은 죽어가게 될 것이다. 나아가 산들이 진동하고 작은 산들이 녹고 땅이 솟아오르며 뒤집히는 이러한 표현은 지진이나 화산 폭발과 같은 격변을 묘사하는 것이다. 

 

-  Did Nahum seek to remind us of the work of God in drying up the sea at the time of the exodus (Exod 14:21–22)?71 “It is characteristic of the whole Bible to be deeply suspicious of the sea; thus, in the Revelation to John part of the promise was that there should be no more sea (Rev 21:1).”72 Psalm 106:9 uses the word “rebuke” in reference to the crossing of the sea at the time of the exodus. Nahum here described God’s absolute mastery of the created order (cp. Isa 50:2; 51:10; Ps 66:6). Just as God brought order into the world, he may reverse the order of creation. Rivers and seas were created to hold water. If the omnipotent God so chooses, he may dry up the sea and the rivers. Nineveh was especially vulnerable at this point. Assyria represented a major part of Mesopotamia, the land between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. Nineveh was proud that they had harnessed the Khoser River. If God can do these things, what will the wicked do in the day of judgment?

Bashan, Carmel, and Lebanon represented the most luxuriant, fertile areas of Palestine.73 They were the least likely areas of all of Israel to show the effects of drought, but “in the presence of the terrifying God, these places would quickly wither and fade.”74 These areas contained most of the timber of Palestine. If Lebanon withered,75 what would happen to the drier areas? Bashan is the northern Transjordan plateau; Carmel is the mountain range running northwestward until it juts into the Mediterranean Sea at Haifa; and Lebanon is the north-south mountain range to the north of Galilee. All these areas would withstand the most devastating drought, but none could stand before the Lord God. Everything comes under subjection to the power of God. “When Yahweh makes war, nature and the very structure of the earth fade and crumble before him.”76

71 Roberts puts all the weight here on the Canaanite mythological background with the sweeping statement that “there is no clear reference to the exodus in Nahum’s use of this mythological language” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 50). One must ask what would constitute “clear reference”?

72 Coggins and Re’emi, Israel among the Nations, 22.

73 Coggins and Re’emi (ibid., 23–24) point to the three mountains as standing elsewhere in opposition to God and Mount Zion (Bashan, Ps 68:15–16; Carmel, Amos 1:2; Lebanon, Ps 29:5–6). All three mountains appear in Isa 33:9. Longman (“Nahum,” 2:790) notes the use of synecdoche here, the three geographical entities standing for the whole earth.

74 See Heflin, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 41; and Maier, The Book of Nahum, 163–65, who gives extensive description and biblical references to each place.

75 Many scholars, including Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 44) and apparently even Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 18, 34) find ways to change Hb. אמלל, the first word of the second line of v. 4 in Hb., into a form of דלל to create a daleth line in the “acrostic.” Maier argues vehemently against such a change (The Book of Nahum, 165–67).

76 Longman, “Nahum,” 2:790.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 174–175.

 

이처럼 하나님이 진노하시면 누구도 그 진노를 막을 수 없다. 그분의 진노가 쏟아지면 아무리 단단한 반석도 결코 우리를 지켜주지 못할 것이다. 나훔 선지자는 하나님께서 바다와 강을 말리시고 격변을 일으킴으로 진노의 심판을 내리실때 누구도 이에 맞설수 없음을 이야기한다. 하지만 주님의 백성들에게는 피할 바위되신 예수님이 계신다. 예수 그리스도는 우리의 반석이 되심으로 우리가 주님에게 붙어 있는한, 주님이라는 반석 위에 서 있는한 진노하시는 하나님의 심판을 두려워할 필요가 없다. 

 

-  1:6 Verses 4–5 prepare the reader for the rhetorical questions of v. 6,81 where four Hebrew words82 express his wrath,83 which pours out like fire and shatters rocks. “Together with other OT writers (Deut 4:24; 9:3; 32:22; Jer 7:20; 42:18; 44:6; Ezek 22:21; Amos 7:4) Nahum makes the red flames an apt picture of God’s consuming wrath.… even the rocks, typical of that which is hardest and strongest, crack into pieces.”84 Roberts is correct in seeing “the function of all this theophanic imagery is to underscore the awesomeness of Yahweh in order to prepare the way for the prophet’s announcement of judgment on the Assyrian enemy.”85 Who indeed can stand before the wrath of the Lord? If the Lord rebukes the sea, dries up Carmel, and strikes fear into all the world, what can the wicked do? His very presence makes the mountains quake and the hills melt away. Those who have seen the power of God know that no one can stand before this awesome God. “If oceans, torrents, plateau countries, and mountain ranges can be wiped out, should Yahweh choose to remove them, what coalition of conquerors, even Assyria itself, can hope to thwart His purposes?”86

These verses remind the modern reader of the Book of Nahum that nothing can stand before the Lord. We tend to think that our technology can save us and that our scientific research will deliver us from our evil. Nahum knew that the mighty army of Assyria could not stand before God. Our progress and technology stand impotent before the presence of God.

81 Longman says, “The effect of the rhetorical questions is to make the reader answer the question unconsciously. These questions also add a sarcastic, taunting note to the discussion” (“Nahum,” 2:791).

82 Longman says זעם, “indignation,” is best translated “curse,” reflecting the judicial context here (“Nahum,” 2:91).

83 Many scholars, including Roberts (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 44), make a rather radical textual emendation to gain a zayin line in the “acrostic,” transposing the first and second words of the line. Maier argues strongly against this: “How could an editor be so stupid or perverse either carelessly or willfully to change the word sequence and to destroy the alphabetical order?” (The Book of Nahum, 173–74). Patterson (Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 18, 36) and Longman (“Nahum,” 2:773–75, 791) argue for the MT. Roberts argues: “The corruption in the present form of the text reflects the tendency in textual transmission for unusual word order in poetic texts to be reverted back to more common patterns over the course of time” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 44).

84 Patterson, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, 172–73.

85 Roberts, Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 51.

86 Maier, The Book of Nahum, 165.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 176–177.

 

7-8절) 여호와는 선하시며 환난 날에 산성이시다. 그분은 자기에게 피하는 자들을 아신다. 그분이 범람하는 물로 그곳을 진멸하시고 자기 대적들을 흑암으로 쫓아내실 것이다. 

앞서 선지자는 진노하시는 하나님에 대해서 경고하고나서 이제 두려워 떠는 이들로 하여금 그 진노를 피할 길이 있다라는 사실을 알려준다. 하나님께서 세상을 향해서 진노를 발하시는 날, 하나님은 자기에게 피하는 자기 백성들에게는 피난처가 되어주시는 선하신 하나님이시다. 

범람하는 물은 노아의 홍수를 연상시킨다. 대적들을 흑암으로 쫓아내신다라는 것은 대적들을 죽음에 이르게 하신다라는 의미이다. 이는 니느웨가 철저하게 멸망할 것을 말씀하시는 것이다. 

 

-  1:7 “Nahum’s text is brutally frank, even terrifying, through the first six verses.”87 God is jealous and avenging; he is slow to anger and great in power. God does command the clouds and the rain; he rebukes the sea and makes the rivers run dry. Who wants to serve such an awesome God? Can you do anything but stand in absolute terror before him? Nahum stops to calm such fears by setting forth “the positive function of God’s warring activities.”88 He does so with the same confessional language with which he began (see vv. 2–3). With such confessional language an individual expresses trust in God and pledges obedience to him (Ezra 8:18, 22; Pss 34:8; 73:1; 100:4–5; 106:1–3; 107:1–2; 109:21; Lam 3:25).

“The goodness of God forms a basic tenet of Israel’s faith (e.g., 2 Chr 5:13; Pss 25:7–8; 69:16; 118:1, 29; 135:3; 136:1; 145:7–9; Jer 33:11).”89 Such goodness is not abstract but “appears most clearly in his dealings with people”90 Original sin was doubting the goodness of God (Gen 3:1–7; cp. Num 14:3, 27). The God who brings judgment does so as a part of his goodness.91 Yes, the same powerful God who does these things is good toward those who fear him.92 He cares for his people who suffer from the hands of any enemy. Believers in Christ have already “tasted that the Lord is good” (1 Pet 2:3).

“These verses have the menacing ring of a judicial indictment, citing the evidence against the accused. It reveals a conspiracy against the Judge himself, the Lord whose justice and supreme authority have been announced in the preliminary proceedings of vv. 2–6; the outcome of the trial is therefore in no doubt, and the sentence is already anticipated in the charge developed here.”93

87 Heflin, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Haggai, 43.

88 Longman, “Nahum,” 2:792.

89 Armerding, “Habakkuk,” 7:464. Robertson (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 70) ties “goodness” to God’s covenant faithfulness.

90 C. B. Bridges, Jr. “Good, Goodness,” EDBT, ed. W. A. Elwell, 305.

91 Heflin sees God is good to mean: he does not sin; he is faithful and trustworthy; he keeps his promises. His goodness is often demonstrated in his mercy.

92 Roberts explains: “God’s wrath is simply the reverse side of his goodness, because, as the continuation in v. 8 indicates, it is precisely Yahweh’s violent judgment on his enemies that effects the salvation of his friends” (Nahum, Habakkuk, and Zephaniah, 52). Achtemeier concludes that “God will be king over us, and it is for us to decide whether he will exercise his kingship in love toward us or in wrath” (Nahum–Malachi, 15).

93 Armerding, “Habakkuk,” 7:464.

 Kenneth L. Barker, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, vol. 20, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1999), 177–178.