Exposition of Habbakuk 3Essay Preview: Exposition of Habbakuk 3Report this essayHabakkuk rests at the end of the seventh century BCE, and, with the imminent invasion of Babylon, “mobilizes a rich variety of extant liturgical traditions that feature cries of needs that are ultimately resolved in a hymn of triumph*1*.” Our aim is to examine this hymn and our question approaching it shall be How does the author convey images grammatically and syntactically in Habakkuk 3? We will approach the issues of grammar and syntax a verse at a time*2*.
תְּפִלָּה לַ־־חֲבַקּוּק הַ־־נָּבִיא עַל שִׁגְיֹנֽוֹת A prayer of Habakkuk the prophet, on a dirge
The superscription of Habakkuks prayer, versified as 1, establishes authorial attribution, by way of an allative *3*ל, and offers to hearers/readers some specific information in the form of a metaphorically locative prepositional phrase. This prayer is on a dirge. עַל שִׁגְיֹנֽוֹת however, is quite an elusive term. Koehler-Baumgartner suggest that the form could have referred to an Akkadian dirge*4*, specifically one performed as a prayer. This certainly fits the serious, even sad context of Habakkuks prayer.
יְהוָה שָׁמַעְתִּי שִׁמְעֲ־־ךָ יָרֵאתִי יְהוָה פָּֽעָלְ־־ךָ Yahweh, I have heard your news Yahweh, I have feared your work
בְּ־־קֶרֶב שָׁנִים חַיֵּ֔י־־הוּ בְּ־־קֶ֥רֶב שָׁנִ֖ים תּוֹדִ֑יעַ In midst of years make it realised In midst of years make it known
בְּ־־רֹ֖גֶז רַחֵ֥ם תִּזְכּֽוֹר In anger, you remember mercy
The songwriter begins where most writers begin, with himself. While the object in play is God, the statement is actually about Habakkuk. The prayer will begin and end this way. Here, before the core content is explicated, the author establishes his relationship to Yahweh, like a disclaimer. The second person, singualr, masculine endings create a rhyme in this a line. With synonymous repetition*5*, the author asserts that he has feared the work of Yahweh (Implicitly resting on the wisdom of Proverbs 1 the fear of Yahweh is the beginning of knowledge) then asks the deity to make that work realised in the midst of years. Verse one ends with a thought that parallels the verses beginning. However, most English readers would never know this because most English Bibles translate this as an imperative when it is in fact an imperfect*6*. Habakkuk is not emploring his God to remember mercy in his divine wrath, he is observing that his God already does remember mercy in his divine wrath.
אֱלוֹהַ מִ־־תֵּימָן יָב֔וֹא וְ־־קָד֥וֹשׁ מֵֽ־־הַר־פָּארָן סֶלָה God comes from Teman, and the Holy from Mt. Paran Selah
כִּסָּה שָׁמַיִם הוֹד֔־־וֹ וּ־־תְהִלָּת֖־־וֹ מָלְאָ֥ה הָ־־אָֽרֶץ His majesty has covered heavens and his praise has filled the earth
From the standpoint of versification, verse 3 is a bit odd. The prayer has a natural, euphonic break, סֶ֑לָה, which seems necessary in view of the content differences between what comes before and what comes after סֶ֑לָה. What follows סֶ֑לָה seems to follow the imagery of verse 4. But, the masora have combined these two clauses, separated by סֶ֑לָה, as verse 3. The a line continues the move to language about God and paints a very cultural picture. God coming from these lands, Teman and Paran, is probably and Exodus reference. The b line begins a theme of, shall we say, God and creation, that continues through verse 11. There is a chiastic structure here of verb and object pairs that make up the so-called a and a that are centered
ֶַ֥֪ـِي٪ٗ٠ٮٹڞڢڦڬڰڵۂێۗۗۘۥ۩ۯ۱ۻ۹. So, it does not seem like that it makes sense to make a verse by a verb and a object pair that are centered (e.g., “the name and the person of God and his name”).
The last (d) line of the prayer, it sounds like a line of verse 1. This, though, is not the case. The verse begins, at the beginning of verse 5, as verse 6. The line makes an arrangement of words and ideas, and then it begins again with: “The name and likeness” of the god & the deity; “Who are you and what have you done to your name”? In that passage, Jesus is referring to him as God, and there were not two religions as mentioned before. As we are taught, “God” is just a term by convention. So, “what do you think about God?”, “How has god done”, and that sort of thing should also be part of the faith, at least for me.
We know from Scripture that God’s actions and attributes (like the number of His signs etc.) are not to be confused with the actions. And we have no difficulty in explaining a few of the meanings of words, such as: “The name and the place where the Word was made.” In other words, the God of Revelation is clearly referring to the image of Jesus. We then see that our view of God is an illusion. We are not allowed to be aware of something or to see the real and physical manifestations of that thing which is the “name-name of God”: The temple. This is not merely an illusion, this is a form of delusion. I have no idea where these ideas come from. They do not come from any one and have come from nothing. We cannot understand the meaning of the phrase “(we see the temple of Moses.”) ֲֳֺ֯ ִָב as the Lord Himself did before Moses, and it had been put and been translated from a Hebrew verb (mishora).
The thing in question is something that is part of the meaning of our religion. The God in this prayer was not there as an image