One Old Testament prophet that often gets overlooked is Habakkuk. Now, I know what you’re thinking: “Only Habakkuk? Outside of a handful of verses mainly in Isaiah, Jeremiah…maybe Ezekiel’s “Valley of Dry Bones”…and a smattering of OT Messianic prophecies scattered somewhere in the minor prophets, what Old Testament prophet doesn’t get overlooked?”
Touche…thanks for the honesty. Hardly anyone has any real idea about any Old Testament prophet.
That’s okay. Don’t feel bad. Because of my master’s program in the Old Testament, I know a whole lot about Jonah, and because of my PhD in the Old Testament, I know a whole lot about Isaiah 1-39…and I know Isaiah 7 like the back of my hand. But until I had to actually teach the entire Old Testament to 9th graders at a small Christian school, I’ll be honest—I couldn’t have told you much of anything about Habakkuk, or Obadiah, or most of them. After eight years of teaching Old Testament in high school, another six years at the college level, and writing my Blue-Collar Bible Scholar Reader’s Guides on both the New Testament and Old Testament (Vol 1 and Vol 2), I can confidently say I have a pretty good grasp on Habakkuk…and the other prophets.
But this post is going to be on Habakkuk. Why? Because over these past couple months, I’ve been teaching an online Old Testament course for my friend’s Anglican diocese; and last week, Habakkuk was one of the prophets we covered.
It got me thinking about a few things, especially in light of the United States’ and Israel’s attack on Iran today…as well as the plethora of unsolicited opinions flooding my social media feed today. I’ll circle back to my reaction to those opinions later. For now, allow me to tell you about what Habakkuk is about.
Habakkuk and His Times
Although there is no specific historical information in Habakkuk, it is generally believed that he was a contemporary of Jeremiah. The book is primarily a prophecy about the rise of Babylon, and we know that the rise of Babylon began in 626 BC, when it declared its independence from the then dominant world power, Assyria, who had been the “big dog” on the world stage for the previous 120 years or so. Therefore, many scholars date Habakkuk somewhere around the beginning of King Josiah’s reign, before he began his reforms in 628 BC. That means Habakkuk probably prophesied sometime between 640-628 BC.
The Issue Raised on Habakkuk
When one reads Habakkuk (it is all of three chapters), it is obvious that Habakkuk is upset over the sins of Judah. In the first discourse, Habakkuk is so upset that in 1:1-4 that he asks YHWH, “How long is it going to take for you to punish Judah for its sins?” The answer YHWH gives him, though, doesn’t sit too well with him. Essentially, YHWH tells Habakkuk in 1:5-11, “Hey, don’t worry about. I’m getting ready to deal with Judah’s sins! I’m going to use Babylon as my ‘wooden spoon’ to render my judgment and spank Judah!”
Interestingly enough, one of the questions Habakkuk poses to YHWH in 1:1-4 is “Can’t you see all the hamas (violence) that is being done in Judah? When are you going to address it?” But then in YHWH’s response, in 1:9, YHWH describes Babylon as “coming for hamas,” meaning Babylon is coming to wreak violence and havoc on Judah—poetic justice, for sure. Because of the violence in Judah, YHWH will let Babylon inflict violence upon Judah as punishment.
That tidbit of information does not sit well with Habakkuk, though. Therefore, in the second discourse, Habakkuk begins by voicing his displeasure at YHWH’s chosen mode of judgment on Judah. In 1:12-2:1, Habakkuk essentially says, “Hold up! BABYLON? You’re going to use BABYLON? How can you use Babylon? It is an utterly immoral and violent nation and you’re a good and holy God!”
YHWH’s response to Habakkuk’s objection is found in 2:1-20, where He tells Habakkuk, “Don’t you worry about Babylon. Of course, I know what Babylon is like, and I’ll deal with Babylon later. It won’t escape my judgment. But for now, I’m going to use Babylon to exercise judgment on Judah.” In fact, in 2:15-17, YHWH says since Babylon is guilty of “shedding the blood of adam (mankind),” that she will eventually be force to “drink the wine of YHWH’s wrath.” This literary connection made between blood and wine is seen elsewhere in the Bible, most notably in Revelation’s description of the punishment of the Whore of Babylon in Revelation 17-18: Because she “drinks the blood of the saints,” she will be forced to “drink the wine of God’s wrath.” In any case, YHWH ends by saying to Habakkuk, “As far as you’re concerned, you need to let me be God, and you need to realize that the righteous will live by faith…faith in me and trusting that I know what I’m doing, despite having to deal with the judgment that is going to come.”
Well, what can one say to that? Therefore, in the third discourse, Habakkuk starts by asking YHWH for mercy in 3:1-2 (basically, “Sorry YHWH, for questioning you! My bad!”). He then contemplates YHWH’s sovereignty and His power to deliver in 3:3-15, and ends by saying in 3:16-19, “Even when things look bad, I will still praise YHWH!”
That’s it. That’s the entire book of Habakkuk. In case you missed it, the main issue Habakkuk wrestles with is this: Can YHWH really use an evil and violent nation like Babylon for His purposes? And by extension, he invites us to contemplate this: Can a holy God use bad people and nations to accomplish His purposes?
Ultimately, Habakkuk came to realize that since YHWH was the one true God of the entire world, YHWH is ultimately in charge of everything. Therefore, even the rise of Babylon fell under YHWH’s sovereignty. So, if YHWH wanted to use Babylon to bring judgment on Judah for its sins, who was Habakkuk to question YHWH mode of justice? Habakkuk comes to realize that all nations (even evil nations like Babylon) rise and fall, and YHWH uses them to accomplish His purposes, and His purposes are good. Therefore, Habakkuk will continue to praise YHWH.
So What? What Should We Learn from Habakkuk?
Reading and studying Habakkuk has forced me to look at world events (not just ancient events, but current world events) from a different perspective. Heck, it has forced me to not only look at various world events from a different perspective, but also specific nations and world leaders.
Essentially, YHWH challenged Habakkuk to hold two seemingly contradictory things in balance concerning Babylon and YHWH justice: (A) Babylon was evil and violent, but (B) Babylon was still YHWH’s chosen method of exercising judgment to accomplish His purposes. Or to put it another way: just because Babylon was bad, that didn’t mean YHWH, in His holiness and sovereignty, couldn’t use Babylon to accomplish His purposes.
Therefore, Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda were clearly evil and murderous, but at the same time, maybe God allowed 9/11 to happen as a form of punishment for some of the United States’ sins. That doesn’t excuse the evil of 9/11—it was clearly evil. But still, God is sovereign and the United States is guilty of its own sins. Besides, ten years later, bin Laden suffered judgment for his evil and his sins as well.
The point is this: that is how God executes judgment and His purposes in this fallen world. He uses nations and people—sometimes extremely evil nations and people—to exercise judgment on other nations for their own sin and evil actions. And later on, those evil nations and people He uses as instruments of His judgment will eventually suffer judgment as well, often at the hands of other nations and people. In this fallen and corrupt world, that is how YHWH often exercises His judgment.
Now how does that relate to the United States’ and Israel’s attack on Iran today? I think that if Christians truly try to develop their worldview from the pages of inspired Scripture, we should take our cue from Habakkuk and conclude that in His sovereignty, God is finally bringing judgment on the regime in Iran for all of its evil and violence it had perpetrated for the past 45 years. That doesn’t mean that the United States is all good and pure; that doesn’t mean Israel is all good and pure. But we still should praise God for finally bringing judgment on that regime and (hopefully) bringing freedom to the Iranian people who have suffered for over a generation under that regime.
Watching the news coverage today has made me hopeful—cautiously hopeful—that perhaps peace can come to the Middle East. If you know anything about the Middle East, you’ll know that Iran was the major disrupter in the region and the #1 state sponsor of worldwide terrorism. And as an American, I want President Trump to be successful in this because it would mean freedom, peace and security for millions of people. Of course, such action has its risks, but I truly hope to God it is successful.
Surprisingly (actually, not surprisingly), I’ve seen a fair share of comments today that not only question Trump’s decision but outright condemn it. Such action must be evil because…you know, Trump did it. I’ve seen Americans quote Iranian officials and side with them, actually believing that the Iranian regime, that just slaughtered upwards of 32,000 protestors over the past couple months, really were ready to talk peace. Iran’s allies are Russia and China, the poster-children for national human rights abuses. Yet for some reason, some people are taking their side because why? Do they honestly think Trump is so evil that he outpaces them in that department?
But this kind of reaction has been standard for “anti-Trumpers”—be they Progressives or anything else. And it’s something I still continue to be mystified by. I get why one might not like him. I don’t like everything he does. But I’ve never let myself become so overcome with hate for the man that I start actually believing he is “evil” on par with Hitler or Stalin.
I mean, look at what happened in Minnesota. Two people who interfered with ICE agents got killed. It was a tragedy. One can lay some of the blame at Trump’s feet for possibly pushing the operations in Minnesota too hard. But at the same time, one should be honest and lay some of the blame on Walz and Frey for their actions. In any case, no one in their right mind thinks Trump ordered ICE to go kill people. For that tragedy, people were calling Trump a murderous dictator. And yet those same people are condemning Trump for trying to take out a regime that literally killed 32,000 protestors over the past couple months.
There is something broken with that kind of moral compass. One can not like Trump; one can object to some of his policies and actions; but he’s nowhere near Iran, or Maduro, or Hitler. Some perspective is in order.
Final Thoughts…Your Opinions Ain’t Inspired Prophecy
What’s more is that I see a whole lot of “anti-Trump” Christians routinely posting condemnation after condemnation for everything Trump does. I think the dark allurement of social media is that it easily can make you feel like you are some kind of inspired prophet, speaking forth the word of God with your posts. This doesn’t just relate to “anti-Trumpers.” It easily can relate to anyone, really. But such a thing can get really intoxicating to do. There’s kind of a rush in “sending forth” your opinion and proclaiming it is practically the inspired prophetic word.
…but hey Christians—it isn’t. Your view on world events, politics, and political figures is just that—your view and opinion. It’s not the result of “the Word of the Lord” inspiration. Habakkuk was inspired. You’re not. And even in the inspired word Habakkuk conveyed, Habakkuk is open and honest about how he struggled with understanding things and how YHWH had to take him down a notch or two.
I think it is good for Christians to be involved in political debates and discussions. I do it from time to time. I think that is how Christians can act as the conscience of the nation they live in. But at the same time, I truly believe that the important thing is that Christians do so with a really big dose of humility. I don’t mean you shouldn’t confidently and forcibly make your arguments and views known. That’s a good thing to do. I just mean we shouldn’t get so arrogant and self-righteous that we convince ourselves that we’re the equivalent of inspired prophets…because we’re not. Our opinions are not “Thus saith the Lord.”
And if you really think that, then you just might be a false prophet.
Habakkuk (who really was an inspired prophet!) had a problem that YHWH would dare use a violent and evil nation like Babylon, and YHWH had to remind Habakkuk that He is a God who gets involved in human history. And that means His way to bring about His purposes in the world is to work through dirty, corrupt, and sinful people and nations in the world. “Hey Habakkuk, instead of bitching about Babylon, be righteous, live by faith in Me, and praise Me for bringing about both just judgment and deliverance.”
Christians shouldn’t be blind to the sins of a nation or a leader. But at the same time, Christians should not allow themselves to be so overcome with hatred for anyone that they are blind to the just judgment and deliverance God is bringing about through a flawed nation or leader.
Christians should be known for praising God for those things, not for constantly bitching about Babylon.
How do you know that Habakkuk was really a prophet? And how do you know that no one today is? Basically, how can we determine who is and who isn’t a prophet?
A quick reply would be this:
(1) Habakkuk is considered a prophet because (A) he claimed “Thus says the LORD,” not just his own opinion; and (B) what he prophesied would happen actually happened within a generation or so. The same goes for the other OT prophets. That’s why we have a book of Jeremiah and not a book of Hananiah–Hananiah claimed “Thus says YHWH! Rebel against Babylon and YHWH will give Judah the victory!” The exact opposite happened, just like Jeremiah prophesied. Hence, the Jews kept Jeremiah’s prophecies and not Hananiah’s.
(2) All I’m saying is that those who are constantly spouting their opinions on social media–especially (sadly) Christians who are obviously hard-core politically partisan who are constantly criticizing and condemning the opposing political party–may CLAIM they are speaking for God when they quote cherry-picked verses out of context, and it may feel really good to condemn others, but they’re not speaking for God. They’re only voicing their own biased views. I’m specifically addressing people like that with my comment.
(3) But in the OT and NT, basically a prophet claimed, “Thus says the LORD,” and what he prophesied actually came to pass within a generation. Prophesying isn’t just a matter of giving one’s opinion. It is a claim that somehow a direct, inspired word has come from God Himself.
Didn’t God do the same thing with evil nations countless times in Judges?
Of course. That’s how the Bible views God’s actions concerning nations all the time. And not just outright evil nations–EVERY nation and leader is flawed. Just because God uses that nation doesn’t mean we need to think they are morally good. Heck, even some of the Judges themselves were pretty bad people. But God used them anyway. God gets down in the mud of humanity to use “muddied up” people to achieve His purposes.
Shane Claiborne would see it differently with what he might call his Jesus lens. How would you answer him?
Statement on Bombing of Iran by Shane Claiborne
Let’s be very clear.
Killing people is wrong.
Attacking Iran is terribly wrong.
We will never build a better world by killing other people’s children.
Violence only begets more violence.
When we live by the sword, we die by the sword.
Two wrongs never make a right.
It is impossible to love our enemies as Christ commands and simultaneously prepare to kill them.
War no more.
No more.
No.
#NoWar #Peace #LoveYourEnemies
Well, I think Shane Claiborne is really simplistic and (not to sound harsh) actually unbiblical.
As soon as he says “Jesus lens,” he’s implicitly suggesting that the Jesus of the New Testament is somehow different than the God of the Old Testament. To be truly biblical and fully Orthodox, we need to NOT dismiss the parts of the Bible we feel uneasy about. And, as Habakkuk and many other books in the Bible make clear, God is sovereign over all nations and uses nations to bring His judgment on people and nations at different times.
Using Claiborne’s rationale, we would have to say God was wrong to use Babylon to bring His judgment on Judah because “violence only begets more violence.”
On top of that, in Revelation–a very New Testament book–the enemies of God’s people eventually get destroyed as a form of God’s righteous wrath.
Now, that doesn’t mean Christians should be cheering war and killing. But neither should we say what Shane is saying, because Shane is saying something unbiblical. Yes, war is horrible…but (as is clear in the Bible) it often has been God’s method of bringing judgment. And in this fallen world, when we have truly horrific tyrants and dictators who (in the Ayatollah’s case) will kill 40,000 protestors in a month without blinking, putting hashtag slogans online isn’t going to help those suffering at the hands of those tyrants and dictators. It’s not loving to sit idly by and allow that kind of unjust slaughter to happen. As Ecclesiastes 3:8 says, there is a time for WAR and a time for PEACE. And there are times when war is necessary in this world. God is not a pacifist. And Jesus was not a pacifist.
We shouldn’t be cheering war on, but neither should we indulge in simplistic pacifist slogans and condemn something in which God is bringing His judgment. As Habakkuk states, the righteous must live by faith–faith and trust that God is sovereign and can use something even like war to bring His judgment.
I understand where you’re coming from based on the Bible. But, my problem is how we can know when a slaughter is due to God using people to punish others or when it’s simply evil people doing harm to others. If God uses evil people to punish other people, could it be that Hitler’s holocaust was actually God using Hitler to punish the Jews. Then, after he was finished, he used the US and its allies to punish Hitler? Whenever we see a group of people killing another group, how do we discern if it’s God behind it or just evil people behind it? That would make all the difference in whether we should support the action or not. And yet, if it’s you and your people being killed, I doubt very seriously if you’d support it even if God was behind it.
Well Randy, I don’t think we need (or can) determine whether or not the Holocaust was actually God using Hitler to punish the Jews. The point Habakkuk has to realize is that a nation (like Babylon) can still be evil and still do evil things, but that in His Sovereignty, God is still in control, working all things for His ultimate purposes. It isn’t our job to try to figure every action by every nation out. We are called to live by faith–trust that God is ultimately in control.
But it isn’t an “either/or” type of thing. In Habakkuk’s time, Babylon was evil and slaughtered people, but he, as an inspired prophet, saw that in that case, YHWH was using Babylon to punish Judah. I’m not an inspired prophet–I’m not going to say God used Hitler, or Osama bin Laden. I can SPECULATE that perhaps 9/11 (although clearly evil) was an instance of God “spanking” America for its sins; but I’m not going to DECLARE that.
And in the post, I tried to this concept to the way many people have been immediately denouncing Trump for invading Iran, as if they have been given some prophetic revelation from God about it. I don’t think they have received such revelation. All I know is that Iran HAS BEEN quite evil over the past 50 years–it IS the #1 state sponsor of terrorism and brutally oppresses the Iranian people. Therefore, I can look at Trump’s actions and think, “Maybe God is using a flawed person like Trump to finally bring about freedom for the Iranian people.” MAYBE…but I’m certainly not going to act like I’m a prophet on that issue.
That was the point.