Deeper Commentary
Haggai Chapter 2
Haggai 2:1 In the seventh month, in the twenty-first day of the
month, the word of Yahweh came by Haggai the prophet, saying- As
noted on Hag. 1:14,15, this allowed about a month for the Spirit of God to
stir up the spirit of Zerubbabel and Joshua in response to their
repentance. But despite that work of the Spirit on their hearts, they
still needed to be called to respond to it (:4). This date
was the seventh day of the feast of tabernacles, exactly when the first
temple was dedicated (2 Chron. 8:8-10), around when the altar was
dedicated (Ezra 3:1-7). This was the time to celebrate harvest- but the
harvest had been pathetic and they were facing starvation. And Haggai will
go on to point out that the new temple was nothing compared to Solomon's
temple (:3). But his message was that despite the failure to build
according to the commands of Ez. 40-48, and not even according to the
pattern of Solomon's temple... God was still prepared to carry on working
with His people, to bring about His restored Kingdom on earth. He would
shake heaven and earth and make that house glorious worldwide (:6,7). The
essence of that Spirit is to be seen in His work with men today.
Haggai 2:2 Speak now to Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, governor of
Judah, and to Joshua, the son of Jehozadak, the high priest, and to the
remainder of the people, saying- As noted on Hag. 1:14, only a
remnant ["remainder"] returned from Babylon, and out of them, it seems
only a remnant were responsive to the Spirit once they returned to Judah.
But from this minority of a minority, God was prepared to work-
even
though there had not been the wholesale repentance and return which He
envisaged, still He was eager to work with a handful of people. And yet
tragically even they appear to have not responded in the long term to
God's possibilities which He had set up for them. This is encouragement to
keep on and on working with people, adjusting to whatever their
dysfunction throws back at us, ever seeking the extension of the
principles of God's Kingdom and His glory through whatever we have left to
work with.
Haggai 2:3 ‘Who is left among you who saw this house in its former
glory? How do you see it now? Isn’t it in your eyes as nothing?-
The allusion is to how some wept and some rejoiced when the
restored temple was completed (Ezra 5:13). Those who wept
did so because it was nothing like the original temple, let alone that
commanded by Ezekiel. There is the hint in Hag. 2:3-9 that despite the
planned temple being smaller than that commanded by Ezekiel, causing some
to weep when the foundations were laid rather than rejoice (Ezra 3:12),
God was still willing to force through His intention of restoring the
Kingdom: "‘Who is left among you who saw this house in its former glory?
How do you see it now? Isn’t it in your eyes as nothing? Yet now be
strong, Zerubbabel!’ says Yahweh. ‘Be strong, Joshua, son of Jehozadak,
the high priest! Be strong, all you people of the land’, says Yahweh, ‘and
work, for I am with you’, says Yahweh of Armies... ‘Don’t be afraid’...
‘The latter glory of this house will be greater than the former’, says
Yahweh". Likewise Zech. 4:10 appealing for the faithful not to despise the
day of small things.
As the walls rose from the foundations laid, the contrast with the earlier temple and that commanded by Ezekiel would have become increasingly obvious. Some very old exiles would have remembered the temple from 70 years ago in their childhood, before the deportation. But the chronologies vary; Daniel 9,10 would suggest that the 70 year period was extended, hence Daniel's concern that the period had ended but still there was no restoration. So Haggai may mean 'Who is left who saw the previous temple? Nobody. And how do your eyes see it? As nothing, compared to the importance of your own houses?'.
Is. 60:7 had prophesied that God would “glorify the
house
of my glory”. But this was in fact a conditional prophecy, capable of
fulfilment through the freewill efforts of the returning exiles, if
they wished to glorify that house. For they
were empowered by Artaxerxes “to beautify [s.w. “glorify”] the
house of the Lord” (Ezra 7:27). All their efforts to glorify / beautify
the house, therefore, would have had God’s special and powerful blessing
behind them. But was the house ultimately glorified? No- for Israel would
not. They got sidetracked by beautifying their own homes, building “cieled
/ paneled houses” for themselves (Hag. 1:4).
The word for “cieled” occurs in 1 Kings
6:9; 7:3,7 to describe the roofing of the first temple- which they were to
be rebuilding, rather than building their own houses. The glory would have
entered the house of God’s glory as it did at the inauguration of the
first temple (2 Chron. 7:1-3). Ezekiel prophesied that ultimately the
glory would fill the temple as it had done then (Ez. 43:4,5). But God’s
prophesy of this in Is. 60:7, that He would glorify His house, meant that
He was prepared to work through men to glorify it. The fulfilment of
Ezekiel’s vision of the cloud of glory entering the temple again could
have been fulfilled if the exiles had done what Artaxerxes empowered them
to do- to glorify the house of glory. And so the fulfilment was delayed.
The glory of the temple the exiles built was tragically less than the
glory of the first temple; and so it would only be in the last day of
Messiah’s second coming that the house shall truly be filled with
glory (Hag. 2:3,7,9), and even that may require a reapplication and
reinterpretation of the concept of God's house. And the lesson ought to be clear for us, in the
various projects and callings of our lives: it becomes crucial for us to
discern God’s specific purposes for us, and insofar as we follow His
leading, we will feel a blessing and power which is clearly Divine.
Haggai 2:4 Yet now be strong, Zerubbabel!’ says Yahweh. ‘Be strong, Joshua, son of Jehozadak, the high priest! Be strong, all you people of the land’, says Yahweh, ‘and work- "Work" is the same word as used in Hag. 1:14 to describe how a month or so earlier, the people had begun again to "work". But now they were flagging and needed further encouragement to go and "work". We noted on :1 that a month had passed since the Spirit of God began working on their hearts. But they still needed to be stirred up to actually use that potential power- to be "be strong... and work". The Corinthians likewise were given the Spirit, as 1 Cor. 1 makes clear, but they were "not spiritual" (1 Cor. 3:1) and needed exhortation to live according to the spiritual potential given them. And we are all in this position.
"Be strong... and work" [Heb. 'do'] is a phrase designed to recall previous usages in the context of returning to the promised land and building the temple. David often used it in encouraging Solomon to establish the Kingdom and build the temple (1 Chron. 28:10,20); it was the prophetic word to king Asa, encouraging him to re-establish temple worship and a spiritual revival (2 Chron. 15:7), and to Joshua in encouraging him to re-enter the land and overcome all opposition from the local tribes there (Josh. 1:7; 23:6); and particularly of being strong and working in rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple (Ezra 6:22; Neh. 2:18; 6:9). They were to accept that God was willing and eager to strengthen their hands in the work; but they had to make use of it.
For I am with you’, says Yahweh of Armies- The repeated title "Yahweh of Armies" would have been understood as a reference to Yahweh as captain of armies of Angels. God makes His Angels spirits; they were a vehicle for the work of the Spirit at that time, as the book of Daniel demonstrates. All that Angelic working was behind every effort Judah would make to rebuild the temple. But they didn't use it. "I am with you to save you from Babylon" (Jer. 42:11) focuses God's presence upon His salvation- Jesus. The prophetic potential became reapplied and rescheduled to us, in that the ultimate term of "I am with you" is in the Lord Jesus and the gift of the Spirit to enable us to extend and establish the work of the Kingdom (Jn. 7:33; 13:33).
Haggai 2:5 This is the word that I covenanted with you when you came out of Egypt, and My Spirit dwelt among you. ‘Don’t be afraid’-
The idea seems to be “The word which I covenanted with you, as well as My spirit, remains amongst you”. God was still seeking to propel forwards His Kingdom purpose, despite the weak commitment of His people. Just as He did at the Red Sea, and just as He does to this day with those He took out of the world through baptism. There is a similar idea in a restoration context in Is. 59:21: “As for me, this is My covenant with them, says the Lord; My spirit that is upon you, and My words which I have put in your mouth, will not depart out of your mouth”. God's spoken word of covenant was to save His people, and His Spirit would continually work to bring this about. The restoration was to be by the work of the Spirit, not by human might, as also stressed in Zech. 4:6 "Not by might but by My Spirit". And we see that work in stirring the hearts of the exiles to leave Babylon, and now again years later stirring up their hearts to respond further. The idea seems to be that "My Spirit abides" with the people, despite their being so weak and temperamental in their spiritual enthusiasm (see especially on :17). This is the language of the Comforter, the Holy Spirit, abiding with us. The Corinthians likewise had the Spirit, it abode with them, but they didn't use it, they weren't open to its influence, and they were "not spiritual". For those who have become God's people, the help of the Spirit is always available, although they have to choose to make use of it.
"My Spirit (Angel- Ps. 104:4) remaineth among you" (AV), just as the same Angel was with them “when ye came out of Egypt”. And with us too. God encourages those rebuilding Jerusalem to have faith because the Angel is still among them: "Yet now be strong. . . and work: for I (the Angel) am with you, saith the Lord of Hosts (Angels): according to the word that I covenanted with you when ye came out of Egypt (the Angel made that covenant) so My Spirit (Angel) remaineth among you; fear ye not". Similarly Nehemiah recounts the past activities of God's Angel (Neh. 9:19-24) as a stimulus to faith in God bringing them through immediate problems. See on Gen. 24:40,56.
But as mentioned on :4, the Spirit was not simply an Angel; it was articulated through the work of God's Spirit on the human spirit or mind. The word of covenant when they came out of Egypt was the entire old covenant; the phrase is thus used at the time of the exodus (Ex. 24:8; 34:27; Dt. 29:1). But throughout Deuteronomy, the second statement of the covenant, there was the repeated encouragement: "Fear not" (Dt. 1:21; 3:2; 20:3 etc.). The context is always of not fearing the local tribes of Canaan, and of being assured that it was simply God's good pleasure to give them the Kingdom. That essential desire of God was true in Haggai's time as it had been in Moses', and it abides true for us. As He sent the Angel before them and amongst them, so His Spirit was and is active in the hearts and circumstances of all who wish to be in His Kingdom and do the work of that Kingdom.
Haggai 2:6 For this is what Yahweh of Armies says: ‘Yet once, it is a
little while, and I will shake the heavens, the earth, the sea, and the
dry land- In a "short time", God would yet once more (GNB) shakes the
heavens and earth as He had done at Sinai when Israel had previously
entered the land and taken the Kingdom (s.w. Ps. 68:8). The potential was
that soon after Haggai's words [in "a little while"] there would be direct
Divine intervention involving earthquakes and the shaking of all nations
(:7) to support the re-establishment of God's Kingdom in Israel under the
Messianic rulership of Zerubbabel. This is also foreseen in Zech. 14,
where the earthquake is seen as creating a new plateau upon which a new
temple could be built. This plateau was also see in the opening of the Ez.
40-48 vision of the commandments as to how to build the new temple
complex. This could be brought about by the shaking /
earthquake which could have come at the end of the Ez. 38 invasion: "in
that day there shall be a great shaking in the land of Israel... all the
men who are on the surface of the earth, shall shake at My presence. The
mountains shall be thrown down, the steep places shall fall and every wall
shall fall to the ground" (Ez. 38:19,20). Had Judah accepted the new
covenant offered to them in Ez. 33,34, they would have revived as in Ez.
37, the Ez. 38 invasion and earthquake would have happened and then on the
resultant plateau, the new temple would have been built. Despite Judah's
failures to engage with these things, Haggai and Zechariah were saying
that if the people wanted, they could have the earthquake and temple. God
really was trying to force through His saving purpose.
But it didn't happen then. Judah didn't repent, and Zerubbabel beat it back to Babylon. These words have therefore been reapplied and rescheduled, to the work of the Lord Jesus on the cross and to the final literal establishment of the Kingdom at His second coming; in this context they are quoted in Heb. 12:26-28.
Haggai 2:7 And I will shake all nations- This is the equivalent
of Daniel's image of the nations being ground to powder and replaced by
the mountain of God's Kingdom which cannot be shaken (:22; Dan. 2:44; Heb.
12:27). Then the prophecy of Ez. 38:20 could have come true, that all the
nations within the eretz
would "shake" (s.w.). These prophecies
could have come true then, but they were rescheduled. The nations in the
land and also the Medo Persian empire would be shaken to destruction soon,
and so the exiles should not fear them and resume the rebuilding of the
city and temple. This is powerful encouragement to us, who are to live as
if we are on the eve of the Lord's return. But the Hebrew here is "I am
shaking", whereas the shaking of :6 is in a future tense. The idea is that
God was already working among the nations to bring about the
re-establishment of His Kingdom which was then potentially possible.
The precious things of all nations will come- This could mean that they would all donate their wealth to the new system of worship in Jerusalem. Or the phrase could be translated "the desire of all nations", referring to Messiah. We note that the same word is used of Saul, the anointed ['messiah'] king of Israel (1 Sam. 9:20). This prediction would then be directly relevant to Zerubbabel, the intended Messianic ruler. We could translate: "The desired one of all the nations will come", a clear reference to a Messiah figure 'coming' who would be associated with the "house" being filled with glory. This is exactly the picture in Ez. 40-48.
This message was given by Haggai at the time that temple building had been stopped by the Persian authorities for fear that they would lose tax revenue, and that the Jews would seek to create an independent state. And now Haggai prophesies exactly those things. Hag. 2:8 is absolutely specific that all wealth belongs to Yahweh, God of the Jews: “The silver is mine and the gold is mine”- not Persia's. This points up the miracle worked by God in the heart of Darius to restore the original decree of Cyrus, allowing the Jew to go ahead rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple. They had been encouraged by Haggai and Zechariah, who both had predicted that Zerubbabel would become an independent king of Judah (Hag. 2:23; Zech. 6:12,13), and indeed before him, the great mountain would fall. Surely that would have been understood as the Persian empire: "Who are you, great mountain? Before Zerubbabel you are a plain; and he will bring out the capstone with shouts of ‘Grace, grace, to it!’" (Zech. 4:7). These prophecies were exactly what the adversaries of Judah were informing the Persians about. And yet against all secular sense, the Persians commanded the rebuilding work to go on. Because of the power of God's Spirit on human hearts.
And I will fill this house with glory, says Yahweh of Armies- Just as Solomon’s temple was filled with glory (1 Kings 8:10,11; 2 Chron. 5:13,14; 7:1,2). Haggai sought to inspire the people when they had flagged in their zeal for the Lord’s house; and the method he chose was to remind them that they could bring about Messiah’s Kingdom if they wholeheartedly worked with God to allow His ideal intentions to come to pass. Note the stress on this house- but that temple they built wasn’t filled with glory, the vision of Ezekiel about the glory returning and entering the temple wasn’t fulfilled- and Solomon’s former temple was more glorious than that of the second temple. Why? Because they didn’t get on and build it and glorify it as they were intended to.
If "the desire of all nations" does refer to Messiah coming with an
earthquake and glory filling the temple, then this is a prophecy of what
could have happened at that
time, but it has been deferred to the second coming of the Lord Jesus.
This is exactly the picture we have in Ezekiel 43, of a Messiah figure
entering the temple in glory. But in Haggai’s context, he is encouraging
the Jews of his time that this is what really and truly could have
happened then and there, had they been obedient. The cherubim visions of Ez. 1,9 and 10 are applied in the New Testament to
the glorified Christ (Rev. 2:18; 1 Pet. 4:17; 2 Pet. 2:4-9). This surely
implies that they were ultimately fulfilled in the Messiah; and perhaps we
are to understand that they could have had fulfilment in a Messiah figure
at the time of the restoration.
It was God's plan that the light of His glory would enter into Zion at
the restoration; but Israel had to act as if they believed this, and
likewise show forth glory: “Arise, shine; for thy light is come, and the
glory of the Lord is risen upon thee” (Isaiah 60:1). He eagerly prophesied
that “strangers shall build up thy walls… in my favour have I had mercy
upon thee” (Isaiah 60:10)- not ‘I am prepared to have mercy upon you’, nor
‘I will have mercy…’. God had had mercy upon them, and invited them to
respond to it.
Haggai 2:8 The silver is Mine, and the gold is Mine’, says Yahweh of
Armies- This may be in answer to the feeling of the exiles that 'We
can't afford to do this work on God's house. We need to sort out our own
houses first' (Hag. 1:4). Such reasoning is often encountered amongst
believers. God's response is that all the silver and gold on the planet is
His. He would provide. And indeed He had done, through the generous
provision of Cyrus for all the material needs connected with the
rebuilding project. The reference could also be to the "precious things"
of :7 which the nations will bring; they are already His, and to give
wealth to Him is only to accept that we do not own it. For we 'give' to
Him what is already His. "The
silver and
the gold" could
refer to all the silver and gold [wealth] that there is. This would imply
an urgency to the rebuilding- if all the wealth of the surrounding world
was to enter the temple as a store house for it, then the temple must be
rebuilt to store it. By being slack to rebuild the temple (Hag. 1:4) and
not doing so according to the specifications in Ez. 40-48, the Divine
purpose with it could not therefore come about. Petty human short
sightedness therefore precluded the fulfilment of so much Divine
potential.
Haggai 2:9 ‘The latter glory of this house will be greater than the
former’, says Yahweh of Armies-
Glory is a theme of Haggai (cp. Hag. 1:8 "that I might appear in glory", Heb.). This is his way of saying that the glory prophesied to enter Ezekiel's temple (Ez. 43:1-5) could indeed enter Zerubbabel's temple; despite the disobedience of the builders to so many details. This entry of glory into the temple is found in Isaiah's restoration prophecies: "I will add glory to My glorious house... I will make the place of My feet glorious" (Is. 60:7,13).
As noted on Hag. 1:8, God would have appeared in glory at the restoration of the temple. The glory of God and His presence was to appear in the temple; but if the Jews wouldn't rebuild the temple, then it wouldn't. In common with Ezekiel, Zechariah and Isaiah, Haggai speaks here of the possible glory that could have been at the restoration, but which has now been postponed until the second coming. Compare this with what actually happened- the old men wept because the new rebuilt temple was nothing like the former temple; see on :3. The glory of the restored temple was prophesied as being far greater than that of the former; Is. 60:17 alluded to this in prophesying that “For brass [in Solomon’s temple] I will bring gold, and for iron [that was in Solomon’s fixtures] I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron”. But it simply didn’t happen, because God’s people were satisfied with a small, inglorious temple so that they could get on with building their own “cieled houses” (Hag. 1:4; the same word is used in describing how the temple of Solomon was “covered”, or cieled, with cedar).
‘And in this place will I give peace’, says Yahweh of Armies- Peace with God, forgiveness through grace. When the foundation stone of the temple was laid, there should have been excited acclamation: “Grace, grace unto it” (Zech. 4:7). But instead the old men wept when the foundation was laid, knowing that the temple was nothing compared to what it ought to be (Ezra 3:12). This would have been possible in Haggai's time, had they built the temple according to the specifications in Ez. 40-48. But it was reapplied and rescheduled to fulfilment in the Lord Jesus, and His second coming. God's promise of peace "in this place" couldn't come about if Judah would not rebuilt the "place". This is the urgency of the appeal. The gift of peace clearly alludes to the blessings for obedience to the old covenant, which Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Zechariah taught had been permanently broken: "I will give peace in the land, and you shall lie down, and none shall make you afraid: and I will remove evil beasts out of the land, neither shall the sword go through your land". The blessings for obedience would be given without their specific obedience- this was the wonder of the new covenant's offer, which they tragically turned down, instead seeking to half heartedly obey the old covenant through keeping parts of the law of Moses. This attempted obedience to the now broken old covenant is stressed several times in Ezra. The promise of peace and glory in the temple never came true. But the essence did, in that in that place, Jerusalem, the Lord was to die and “made peace through the blood of His cross” (Col. 1:20). Note that God’s “glory” consists in this “peace".
Haggai 2:10 In the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, in the second
year of Darius, the Word of Yahweh came by Haggai the prophet, saying-
The wonderful potentials mentioned in the preceding verses were precluded
by Judah's unspirituality, and Haggai now addresses that.
In the two
months since that prophecy (:1), there had been little progress.
The 24th day of the 9th month was when the foundation of the
temple was laid (:18), exactly three months after the building work on the
temple resumed. Whilst the foundation had been dug and laid out in Ezra
5:16, the symbolic laying of the foundation stone [with some kind of
ceremony] was not done until later; or perhaps this was a rededication
ceremony as the work revived. The following arguments are therefore in
relation to the temple. Purity was not spread by physical contact e.g.
with a temple; and impurity spread easily. The returnees were impure
already, and could not be made any further unclean through the 'guilt by
association' which they feared by fellowshipping with Gentiles or the Jews
already living in Judah.
Haggai 2:11 Thus says Yahweh of Armies: Ask now the priests concerning
the law, saying- Haggai is addressed to Zerubbabel and Joshua the
high priest. Perhaps they were being asked to ask this question. The
answer of the priests is given in :12 and :13 so we assume this was
literally asked and answered. But in :12 Haggai asks the question, so
perhaps this is addressed to Haggai. It is a common Divine method to ask a
question in order to elicit a conclusion within the conscience of the
questioned person.
The point of this section in 2:11-14 is really an appeal for purity, and an understanding that purity cannot be obtained by mere contact with the pure. It is a matter of the heart. The need for the returnees to be cleansed is major. But it was exactly their lack of repentance and cleansing which precluded the restoration prophecies from fulfilment at that time. Ez. 43:9 implies that had they cleansed themselves at this time, Yahweh would have literally dwelt for ever in Zion: "Let them put their apostasy and the corpses of their kings far from Me, and I will dwell among them forever". We note that the question in Hag. 2:13 was specifically about defilement from a corpse, so it is alluding to Ez. 43:9. They were still unclean and thus precluding the fulfilment of Ez. 40-48.
Haggai 2:12 ‘If someone carries holy food in the fold of his garment,
and the garment touches bread, stew, wine, oil, or any food, will it too
become holy?’. The priests answered, No- The questions of :12 and :13
lead up to the bald statement in :14 that the Jews are "unclean" and their
work for God unacceptable. This hard statement is in juxtaposition to all
the wonderful Messianic and Kingdom prophecies of the preceding verses,
uttered just weeks previously. The questions of :12 and :13 add up to
this: Uncleanness can be passed on easily, whereas holiness is not passed
on. Just a scrap of sanctified food caught up accidentally in the fold of
a robe doesn't make that garment holy, and if that garment then touches
the things offered in sacrifice to God, they are not thereby made holy.
This was the essence of the argument being used by the Jews. They
considered their unclean offerings were made clean through the most
contorted and unrealistic path of reasoning. They thought they could be
acceptable to God because of some legalistic, theoretical 'acceptability
by association', even though the Mosaic law didn't support such reasoning.
The mentality is seen today, in those nominal believers who imagine that
their external association with some organized religion or denomination
somehow guarantees their acceptability with God. The
argument serves as a caveat against the mentality that holiness is spread
physically- and there clearly were some who imagined that a rebuilt temple
would somehow make the people holy.
Haggai 2:13 Then Haggai said, If one who is unclean by reason of a
dead body touch any of these, will it be unclean? The priests answered, It
will be unclean- As explained on :12, the Jews were thinking that
they were acceptable to God by some quasi spiritual, pseudo logical path
of reasoning whereby a fragment of holy bread could pass on to them
personal acceptability before God. But the reality was that this wasn't
support by God's principles in the law. What the law emphasized instead
was that uncleanness spreads. And they were unclean (:14).
Judah in the new temple would not “defile” Yahweh’s Name any more (Ez. 43:7,8) e.g. by touching dead bodies (Ez. 44:25); but they were lazy to keep the uncleanness laws, they did defile Yahweh by touching dead bodies and then offering the sacrifices (Hag. 2:13,14 s.w.), just as Israel previously had been defiled by touching the dead bodies of their kings and then offering sacrifices (Ez. 43:7); but now, Judah thought they were above God’s law, and therefore did exactly the same things which had caused the temple to be destroyed in the first place. The promise that Yahweh would dwell in the new temple was conditional on them not touching dead bodies (Ez. 43:9); but Hag. 2:13 makes it apparent that they did this very thing at the time of the restoration.
LXX adds "they shall be pained because of their toils; and ye have hated him that reproved in the gates".
Haggai 2:14 Then Haggai answered, ‘So is this people, and so is this nation before Me’, says Yahweh; ‘and so is every work of their hands. That which they offer there is unclean- The specific work of their hands was surely their partial rebuilding of the temple and offer sacrifice there, but not according to the specifications in Ez. 40-48. Their work was so compromised by their wrong attitudes that what they built was therefore unclean. The reference may also be to the animals and crops raised by 'the work of their hands' (:17) which they then offered as sacrifices; but this was rejected by God as unclean. The people who had returned from exile were obsessed with separation from the Samaritans and also from their own brethren who had remained in the land. Haggai is warning them that the returnees themselves were unclean because of their attitudes, so all attempts to remain pure from the supposedly impure were irrelevant. "This people" may refer to the returnees and "this nation" to all the Jews including those already living in the land when the returnees arrived. They were all alike unclean, so the returnees were wrong to treat the other Jews as unclean and to argue that they had to avoid contamination from them. They were already unclean themselves by their attitudes. And this is a big argument against 'guilt by association' in all its forms.
"What they offer there" refers to the altar they had rebuilt in Ezra 3. They wrongly thought that that altar would somehow make them clean. But because their attitudes were wrong, it actually made all sacrificed upon it unclean. Or the idea may be that because they were unclean, they had made the altar unclean and therefore so were their sacrifices offered upon it.
Haggai 2:15 Now, please consider from this day and backward, before a
stone was laid on a stone in Yahweh’s temple- Every day counted.
Haggai asked them to look back through the few months during which he had
given his prophecies about the great possibilities for re-establishing the
Kingdom with God's abundant blessing. Even during those days, they had
been guilty of not responding, and so the drought had not been lifted.
Haggai 2:16 Through all that time, when one came to a heap of twenty
measures, there were only ten. When one came to the wine vat to draw out
fifty, there were only twenty- Blessings of good harvests, corn and
wine, were all part of the blessings promised for obedience to the
covenant. But throughout the days Haggai had been appealing to them, their
last harvest had been eaten away by disease and plague ("blight, mildew,
and hail", :17). These words may be addressed specifically to Zerubbabel
and Joshua (see on hag. 1:1). They had lost their harvests, because of
refusing to respond to the call of Haggai.
This verse gives very precise commentary on the state of the harvests
in Judah after the return- grain stores were 50% below the norm, and the
amount of wine produced was 60% less than
expected. Surely these figures were well known
to the people- for they had presumably worked them out, and Haggai is
quoting their figures back to them. Notice how the people had worked out
the yield of wine which they
expected. The implication
would seem to be that they returned to Judah expecting material
prosperity, good harvests and personal wealth; hence their bitter
disappointment when they didn't get it. This, then, would appear to have
been their motivation for the return- rather than obedience to the words
of the prophets or a desire to see God's Kingdom established in His land.
Haggai 2:17 I struck you with blight, mildew, and hail in all the work
of your hands; yet you didn’t turn to Me’, says Yahweh- This striking
of the harvest had been over the two months or so since Haggai had
prophesied and encouraged them to live up to their potential; see on
:16. They had returned to the land, but not to God. They were still
impenitent, blaming their situation on the sins of the fathers and of the
Gentiles around them. The afflictions mentioned were the very punishments
mentioned for committing unfaithfulness to the covenant, and which would
climax in being removed from the land (Dt. 28:22; 1 Kings 8:37). They had
returned to the land, but were doing the very things which had led to them
being expelled from the land, and experiencing the same judgments which
they had in the lead up to the exile (Am. 4:9).
"I smote you with blasting and with mildew" alludes to the curses for disobedience in Dt. 28:22 and Am. 4:9. They had argued that they were simply delaying obedience until what they considered the right time. But God saw through that excuse and counted it as disobedience. They are rebuked for not turning i.e. repenting, a tacit acceptance that their consciences had been touched by the disparity between their houses and God's house. But they had subdued those prods of conscience beneath the reasoning that they would be obedient, but at a later time. Here we see how God analyses the human mind and sees right through all our mind games.
The tragedy of "You didn't turn to Me" in Hag. 2:17 is that God has repeatedly tried to comfort the returned exiles that "I am with you" (Hag. 2:4; 1:13)... "My Spirit dwelt [and dwells] among you" (Hag. 2:5). But they didn't want to be with Him, to realize the presence of His Spirit amongst them, just as the Corinthians were not spiritual although they had been richly given the Spirit. The returnees were preoccupied by the immediate, and their desire to live their petty dreams. And so it is oftentimes with man. Haggai's call echoes to us- not to be preoccupied with life and material things. The final restoration prophet concluded with the promise that God would have to send the Elijah prophet to turn their hearts to God: "He will turn the hearts..." (Mal. 4:6). Despite the religious system developed by the returnees and their exclusion of others, they didn't obey Haggai's call to turn their hearts to their God. And so through the Elijah prophet it was God's plan to almost forcibly turn their hearts to Him. But even the fulfilment in John the Baptist and the appearance of God's Son only achieved this in a minority. The problem was [and still is] preoccupation with man's immediate agendas, be they religious or secular.
The implication of Hag. 2:17 is that they had not totally turned to Yahweh. They had responded to Haggai's call to resume work in Hag. 1:12,13 and God had been as it were much enthused by it. But after a month's work they needed more appeal. They still hadn't turned completely and permanently to Him, with a 'repentance not to be repented of' as Paul would say. Zechariah's prophecy came two months after Haggai (Zech. 1:1). And he appeals again for the people to turn to God (Zech. 1:3). And even after Zechariah's time, the people still didn't really return to Yahweh in repentance, despite their focus on legalism and xenophobic hatred of Gentiles: "Return to Me, and I will return to you, says Yahweh of Armies. But you say, ‘How shall we return?’" (Mal. 3:7). Clearly their turning to Him had been only temporary. But still God was enthusiastic over their even very temporal response. Despite surely foreknowing how they would very quickly flag. He so wanted the Kingdom to be restored and His people to live in all joy and peace of relationship with Him. And that desire is unabated to this day, despite having been frustrated by His people so often, so deeply and for so long.
Haggai 2:18 ‘Consider, please, from this day and backward, from the
twenty-fourth day of the ninth month, since the day that the foundation of
Yahweh’s temple was laid, consider it- See on :10 for
discussion of how this was a later laying of the foundation stone after
the initial foundations had been laid. They were being asked as in
:15 to think back over the days since the rebuilding program began.
Although they had apparently worked to rebuild the temple, day after day
had been of drought and pestilence. Their work for God had been "unclean"
(:14) because their motives were impure, as noted on Hag. 1:4. But there
is a purposeful ambiguity with the word translated "backward"; it can also
mean "upward" or effectively 'forward'. In this case, as suggested on :19,
Haggai was urging them to repent that very day, and see the changes that
would happen in the weather and the fertility of their land. "Consider..."
was therefore an appeal for repentance. This appeal was repeated in the
eighth month (Zech. 1:1,4,6); and there was apparent response to that
appeal (Zech. 1:6). But now in the ninth month, it was apparent that the
repentance was only nominal.
Haggai 2:19 Is the seed still in the barn? Yes, the vine, the fig
tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree haven’t brought forth. From this
day on I will bless you’- The original could imply that God had
promised blessing upon them, from the first day the rebuilding program
started (:18). But it hadn't come. Their harvests were so small that it
was as if they had never even sown anything, and the seed was still in the
barn; and the fruit trees had not born anything. We see here how God can
promise things which are conditional even if the conditions aren't
highlighted; and so the promised blessing will not come about
automatically. Or the original could equally suggest that although indeed
there had been no harvests, from that very day on "I will bless you",
because God through Haggai hoped for their immediate repentance that day.
See on Hag. 1:8. There was no seed in the barns for sowing. They faced
real starvation. Hence God promises to give them miraculous blessing from
that day, immediately, if they responded from the heart. They had no seed
to sow, therefore it was no good promising them a better harvest next
time. They needed food there and then.
Haggai 2:20 The Word of Yahweh came the second time to Haggai in the
twenty-fourth day of the month, saying- This must be the same 24th
day of the ninth month which has been twice mentioned (:10,15). As
expounded above, on that very day Haggai had begged for repentance, and
invited them to make a note of the day and to see how God's blessing would
be poured out afterwards, whereas before that it had been withheld. Haggai
had declared this day a watershed. And now we have a prophecy which seems
to assure Zerubbabel that he would in fact be made the Messianic ruler.
Perhaps he did repent that day, and so God eagerly went ahead in the
following prophecy and assured him that he could indeed achieve the
Messianic potential he had.
Haggai 2:21 Speak to Zerubbabel, governor of Judah, saying, ‘I will
shake the heavens and the earth- The repetition of
"I will"
is as if to say that the promise of major Divine intervention and the
re-establishment of the Kingdom promised in :6 (see note there) would not
come about, whereas its fulfilment had been in question. This would fit
the suggestion made on :20 that Zerubbabel repented and so the Divine
program and possibilities with him resumed.
The day when heaven and earth would be shaken was the day when the second temple was to be filled with glory as Ezekiel had said. Then¸there would be major war between the Gentile nations, and Zerubbabel would be some kind of Messiah figure. But none of these things happened. Their fulfilment was delayed until the last days, when all nations who come against Jerusalem will slay each other, and “my servant” the Lord Jesus will be proclaimed as Messiah. Then, in our time of the end, the heavens and earth will be shaken (Heb. 12:26,27). It could have happened while the second temple was standing- but it didn’t, thanks to Israel’s indolence.
2:21-23 is a sad ending to the prophecy. The idea is clearly
enough that Zerubbabel would become king and the whole planet would be
brought under his reign, with the thrones of all kingdoms uprooted by him.
Zech. 4:9; 6:12 likewise prophecy that Zerubbabel would complete his
intended work. But that didn't happen. At best Zerubbabel just disappears
from the scene, and according to tradition he returned to Babylon and gave
up on the restoration. The essence will be fulfilled in the Lord Jesus,
but this, like Ez. 40-48 and the prophecies there about "the prince", is a
detailed potential prophecy about a man that just never came true.
Haggai 2:22 I will overthrow the throne of kingdoms. I will destroy
the strength of the kingdoms of the nations. I will overthrow the
chariots, and those who ride in them. The horses and their riders will
come down, everyone by the sword of his brother- Haggai 2:6,7 clearly
stated that
very soon
the desire of all nations would come to the temple, and Yahweh would fill
the temple with His glory, just as He had when the first temple was built
(this is another proof that the temple of the restoration was to be based
upon the pattern of Solomon’s). This was to be brought about by
Yahweh
shaking all nations, with the result that in a great battle, they would
kill each other; and
then Zerubbabel “my servant”
(a Messianic title) would be the King of God’s Kingdom. But this didn’t
happen “soon” after those words were spoken. Indeed, they are quoted in
Heb. 12 as now having relevance to our last days. “I will
overthrow…kingdoms” is the language of Dan. 2:44- perhaps it could have
been that four kings arose after Nebuchadnezzar and then Babylon would
have been destroyed. Thus Dan. 2:42 speaks of
the singular Kingdom being
divided, as if referring to the Kingdom of Babylon / Nebuchadnezzar. Thus
the image stood complete when the stone hit it- the whole dynasty of
Nebuchadnezzar was to be destroyed. But this didn’t happen, and so other
interpretations of the image prophecy became possible, each fitting
perhaps less accurately than the intended fulfilment would have done.
Likewise Haggai 2:22 continues by saying that in that “overthrow”, “the
horses and their riders shall come down, every one by the sword of his
brother”. This is the language of Zech. 14:13; that prophecy also could
have had a fulfilment at the restoration, but it is now deferred until the
last days.
That same passage also envisages an earthquake around Mount Zion,
preparing a plateau upon which the temple could be built, as required in
the temple plans of Ez. 40.
In the immediate context, the prophecies of Haggai encouraged the Jews to persevere with building the temple; but clearly he expresses the agenda that this will become a kingdom that will take over other kingdoms. The adversaries of Judah made exactly this point to the Persian emperor. They weren't wrong nor exaggerating. The fact the decree was given to re-start the temple building program is therefore real evidence of the amazing hand of God moving the hearts of men to go against all that is sensible or rational. This is the power of His Spirit on the human heart. For in the Ancient Near East, temple building was definitely associated with political power; it was never merely religious. And Darius encouraged the Jews to build the temple with all that was implied by it.
Haggai 2:23 In that day, says Yahweh of Armies, will I take you, Zerubbabel, My servant, the son of Shealtiel’, says Yahweh, ‘and will make you as a signet ring, for I have chosen you’, says Yahweh of Armies- Setting as a signet ring effectively means Divine appointment as the king of Judah, as in Jer. 22:23-25. The re-established kingdom could have had a Divinely appointed Messianic king in the line of David, Zerubbabel. Just a few months later, Zech. 3:8 speaks of "My servant the branch", a clear reference to Zerubbabel, "branch of God", as the Messianic ruler figure. God says He will do this; but it seems Zerubbabel didn't want it, and the people weren't ready or willing for it. And so the prophecy in essence is reapplicable to the Lord Jesus, the "My servant" of Isaiah's prophecies.
Dan. 9:25 appears to identify “the anointed one, a prince” with the
restoration of Jerusalem after the return. The Masoretic punctuation of
Dan. 9:25 actually suggests that ‘Messiah the prince’ appears after the
first seven of the seventy weeks- perhaps there was the possibility 49
day-years after the command to rebuild Jerusalem for a Messiah to have
appeared? This would’ve fitted Zerubbabel perfectly. Lk. 3:27 describes
Zerubbabel as the head / chief / leader. The term Rhesa is incorrectly
rendered in many versions as a name. Perhaps Luke’s point was that the
Lord Jesus was the final Messiah, after the failure of so many potential
ones beforehand. ‘Zerubbabel the chief’ would then be a similar rubric to
“David the king” in Matthew’s genealogy (Mt. 1:16). Zerubbabel was the
‘head’ of the house of David (Ezra 4:3; Hag. 2:23; Zech. 3:8; 6:12,13), as
was his descendant Hattush (Ezra 8:1-3 cp. 1 Chron. 3:22). As the grandson
of Jehoiachin, Judah's exiled king, Zerubbabel would've been the
legitimate king of Judah. Potentially, Hos. 1:11 could have come true:
“Judah and… Israel shall be gathered together, and they shall appoint for
themselves one head [Zerubbabel?]; and they shall go up from the land, for
great shall be the day of Jezreel” (RSV). And perhaps as head of the house
of David, Zerubbabel was intended to be the “David my servant” who would
be the one king and one shepherd who would lead Israel back to the land
from exile (Ez. 37:22,24). Significantly, Neh. 7:7 describes Zerubbabel as
being at the head of twelve leaders of the returning exiles, who are
called “the people of Israel” (cp. Ezra 2:2).
Zerubbabel like his people simply didn’t live up to it; and the
prophecies came to be fulfilled finally in Jesus. He could have been
Yahweh’s signet ring (Hag. 2:23), His specially favoured son- but he
baulked at the height of the calling.
Previous Chapter
