Chapter One

1. Historical-chronological introduction. 2–4. The cause of the stoppage in temple construction and the groundlessness of this cause. 5–8a. The disastrous consequences of the people’s neglect of temple building. 8b-11. Exhortation to resume construction. 12–15. Historical note on the success of the prophet’s first speech – on the beginning of work on temple construction.

Haggai 1:1. In the second year of King Darius, in the sixth month, on the first day of the month, the word of the Lord came through Haggai the prophet to Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel, governor of Judea, and to Joshua, son of Jozadak, the high priest: In accordance with the predominantly historical character of the book of the prophet Haggai, it begins with a precise and definite chronological date of the first appearance of the prophet, just as all his subsequent speeches are precisely dated by the time of their pronouncement (Hag 2:1). The method of dating reveals the notable influence of Babylonian reckoning on Judean: it is evident that the Babylonian calendar and Chaldean reckoning in general were well assimilated during the captivity by the Judeans, as is proven by similar dates in the books of the prophets Daniel (Dan 10:1) and Zechariah (Zech 1:7), as well as Nehemiah (Nehem 1:1). The difference from the ancient Hebrew method of dating here consists, first of all, in the fact that, if previously the sacred writers dated events by the years of three related Hebrew, Judean, and Israelite kings (for example, Jer 25:1), then from the time of captivity and after it, the beginning in the reckoning of events, the sacred writers took the years of the reign of foreign kings who conquered the Judeans. “Before the captivity,” says blessed Theodoret, “the prophets inscribed the years of Judean and Israelite kings; after the return from captivity, since the Judeans no longer had their own kings, the divine Haggai sets forth the year of the Persian king, and mentions not only the year but also the month and day, wishing to show not only the speed of building, but also the abundance of mercies with which God of all things gives his blessing to those who build” (p. 58). The name Darius, Hebrew Daryavesh, ancient Persian Darayavaus, Babylonian Darijamus 1, here, as in the book of Ezra (Ezra 4:24), is commonly recognized to denote Darius Hystaspes, who occupied the Persian throne from 521 to 485 B.C.; consequently, his second year of reign was 520 B.C. This year, according to the calculation of blessed Jerome, was the seventieth from the destruction of the temple – according to the prophecy of Jeremiah (Jer 25:12) and according to the testimony of the prophet Zechariah (Zech 1:7) – a significant coincidence, because it shows the precision of the fulfillment of the predictions of the prophet Jeremiah about the desolation of the Holy Land, in particular and of the temple, for seventy years; that the temple from the year 520 remained in desolation, Hebrew hareev, is spoken of in Hag 1:4. If the prophet Haggai indicates the year of his appearance for prophetic ministry by the year of the contemporary reign, then the month and day of this event he – in the spirit and practice of both the pre-captivity (Ezek 1:1) and post-captivity (Zech 1:7) reckoning – dates according to the calendar year – the Hebrew, during and after captivity, which received names for each of the 12 months. The sixth month, later called Elul (Nehem 6:15), according to this calendar, corresponds to the second half of our August and the first of September. Thus, the appearance of the prophet fell in the second half of August 520 B.C., specifically on the new moon, or the first day of the month, always considered a festival, first only a religious one (Num 28:11-14), and then also civil (1 Sam 20:5) and onward, Amos 5:8; especially according to the Talmud). – In the expressions: through (Hebrew beyad, LXX: ἐν χειρὶ, Vulg. in manu) Haggai, as well as in the addition to the prophet’s own name of the name of his function nabbi – prophet, some commentators wrongly saw an indication of the too late origin of the book: for both peculiarities one can find parallels even from more ancient, pre-captivity prophetic literature, – for the first, for example, in Isa 20:2; Hos 1:2; for the second – in Hab 1:1 (see our remark on the latter place). The rendering of the first expression in the LXX, Vulgate, and Slavonic should be recognized as too literal, and the Russian “through” should be preferred. The LXX Slavonic contain a pleonastic addition: λέγων εὶπῶν, Slavonic: “speaking: say.” But this addition, apparently, was borrowed only from analogy with other speeches of the prophet, see Hag 2:1. The Vulgate, however, renders one of these words: dicens. The word of the Lord through the prophet Haggai was addressed to the secular head of the Judean community in Jerusalem – Zerubbabel, and to its spiritual representative – the high priest Joshua. Zerubbabel, Zerubbabel, LXX: Ζοροβάβελ, a descendant of David, son of Shealtiel, and in many other biblical places is presented as the leader of the first caravan of Judeans who returned from captivity, the founder of the temple, and governor of Judea (see Ezra 2:2; Nehem 7:7; Zech 4:6). But on the other hand, in the book of Ezra, the same activity is ascribed to a certain Sheshbazzar, also called “the prince (nasi) of Judea” and governor or provincial administrator (pehah) of Judea (Ezra 1:8). The question that arises from this about the relationship of Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar is solved by most Western scholars in the sense of the distinctness of these persons (see Marti, p. 382, Andre, p. 48–63), whereby in Sheshbazzar some see a Persian official (Stade, Smend), appointed as a representative of the Persian government as head of the Judean province, and others see a Judean – with similar functions (Meyer, Renan, and others), perhaps a distant relative of the royal house. But closer to the truth, although not excluding objections against itself, should be recognized the opinion of scholars who see in the names Zerubbabel and Sheshbazzar only two names, Hebrew and Chaldean, of one and the same person – namely, a descendant of David, son of Shealtiel (1 Chr 3:19), one of the ancestors of the Lord, our Savior in the flesh (Matt 1:12-13). (See “Explanatory Bible” vol. III p. 624.) “This Zerubbabel,” says blessed Jerome, “by birth of the tribe of Judah, that is, from the line of David, is a type of the Savior, who truly restored the ruined temple, that is, the Church, and again led the people out of captivity. He built the Church both from the old stones of the temple and from new ones that had not been worked before, that is, he built a dwelling place for God the Father both from the remnants of Israel and from the multitude of heathen peoples” (p. 320). By etymology, the most probable Hebrew Zerubbabel can be rendered: “born (properly: sown) in Babylon.” According to blessed Jerome, this word “can mean either: a nearby stream, ρεῦ:σις παρα κειμένη, – or: born in Babylon, or: prince of Babylon... according to Hebrew tradition this name consists of three completely independent words: zo – that one, rob, teacher, or: elder, and babel, Babylonian...” (p. 320–321). As the first meaning (“a nearby stream”), so also the last, supposedly traditional Hebrew etymology of the name Zerubbabel, cannot certainly be accepted. So much the more deserving of attention is the further comparison made by blessed Jerome: “just as Jesus, son of Joshua, who was also a type of the Savior, led the people from the wilderness into the land of promise, so also this one (Zerubbabel) was born in Babylon in order to lead those who were in Babylon back again to the land of promise, from which they had been led away as captives” (p. 321). The official title of Zerubbabel in the book of the prophet Haggai: pehah, more fully: pehat – Yehudah (Hag 1:1). The name pehah with the meaning: “provincial administrator” is encountered even in the time of Solomon (1 Sam 10:15; 2 Chr 9:14), is repeated then in the commanders, pahot, of Syria (1 Sam 20:24). As the designation of a viceroy or leader with authority at once civil and military, pehah was encountered among the Assyrians (2 Sam 18:24, Isa 36:9), among the Chaldeans (Ezek 23:6; Jer 51:23) and among the Persians (Esth 3:12), in particular – in application to the administrators of provinces beyond the Euphrates (Ezra 8:36: Nehem 2:7-9). The word derives from the Assyrian pahatu, properly: bel-pahatu, administrator of the district; a variant of it is the Turkish “pasha.” Alongside the secular head or prince of the Judean community, with the prophet Haggai, as in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, is named the spiritual head of the post-captivity Judeans – the high priest Joshua, son of Jozadak (Zech 3:1 see also Ezra 2:2 and onward, Nehem 7:7). Such a division in the Judean people of supreme power into secular and spiritual is entirely natural and fully corresponds to historical reality. And if some Protestant scholars (Marti, Stade) deny the existence among the Hebrews in the pre-captivity period of the high-priestly dignity and the very name kehengadol “high priest,” then against this speaks, for example, even the testimony of 2 Sam 12:11. But besides the historical significance of both powers, they could have typological significance, which is pointed out by blessed Jerome, saying: “In relation to history, one – Zerubbabel – is from the royal tribe, the other – Joshua – from the priestly tribe, but in relation to spiritual understanding, here is meant one and the same Lord and Savior of ours, King and Great High Priest, the type of whom in his kingly service was borne by Zerubbabel, and in his high-priestly service – by him who was named Jesus, which means salvation, Jao, that is, the salvation of the Lord...” (p. 322).

Haggai 1:2. Thus says the Lord of hosts: “This people says, ‘The time has not come, the time for the Lord’s house to be built.’ Haggai 1:3. And the word of the Lord came through Haggai the prophet: Haggai 1:4. “Is it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while this house lies in ruins? In light of the fact that in quality of those to whom the first speech of the prophet is addressed, only Zerubbabel and Joshua are named in verse 1, while the people are not named, as they are named (sheerit ha’am, the remnant of the people) later in Hag 2:2, some commentators (Ley, Andre) supposed that the first speech was addressed exclusively to the ruler Zerubbabel and high priest Joshua, and they alone related the reproaches expressed in it regarding indifference to the construction of the temple. In reality, both the general meaning of the speech and certain particulars of it indicate that it is directed to the entire people and contains both reproaches and accusation of the people itself: the very opening of the speech: “this people says...” (v. 2) shows that the prophet condemns the actions of the whole people: the reproach concerning solicitude for the adornment of their own houses, neglect of the House of the Lord (v. 4), also relates to whole groups of the people; the chief matter, however – those natural disasters which, according to the prophet’s words, struck and still were to strike the people in case of its stubbornness (Hag 1:6), as naturally understood, can relate only to the whole people who returned to Palestine and settled in it. If Zerubbabel and Joshua had any guilt, it consisted solely in insufficient vigor in compelling the people to construction. This guilt was rather indirect, and in the accusation of the people Zerubbabel and Joshua appeared rather as witnesses of the accusation than as the accused. “Think carefully,” says blessed Jerome, “about the fact that it is not Zerubbabel and not Joshua who say: ‘The time has not yet come to build the house of the Lord,’ but the people, which, being under the authority of King Darius, has not yet thrown off the yoke of slavery” (p. 322). “When,” remarks blessed Theodoret, “Joshua was high priest and Zerubbabel was leader of the people, God before them, as before certain judges, accuses the people through the prophet and says: so much strenuous care do they apply to their own houses, not only do they build, but also adorn them, and they do not want to build the house of God, for which all of them participate in their common salvation, claiming that the time does not favor the creation” (p. 59). The opening words of the speech: “Thus says the Lord of hosts” (v. 2a) are very customary in prophetic usage as an introductory formula when prophets announce divine revelation. This formula, specifically with the inclusion of the name of the Lord of hosts, is encountered most frequently, besides the prophet Haggai, also among the prophets: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Zechariah, Malachi. It is necessary, therefore, to reject the opinion of Marti, that by the frequent repetition of the mentioned formula the prophet Haggai reveals the weakness or lack of clarity of his consciousness of his divine mission and wishes to give his words divine authority, which in an intense degree was possessed by ancient prophets (p. 382). On the contrary, this formula is very frequently used precisely by earlier prophets, in whom, according to Marti’s supposition, the consciousness of their mission from God was especially vivid. The essence of the reproach made by the prophet on behalf of Yah to the people in verses 2 and 4 consists in pointing out the sharp contrast which was created by the exaggerated care of the people for their own private dwellings and – complete neglect in the creation of the temple, which presented a spectacle of desolation: the Judeans themselves, at least the wealthiest of them, dwelt “in houses that were adorned and well-arranged, and intended not so much for the satisfaction of needs as for luxury, while the dwelling place of God, in which there was the Holy of Holies, the cherubim, and the table of the showbread, was rained upon, was soiled from lack of care, and was exposed to the action of the sun’s burning rays” (blessed Jerome, p. 323).

Haggai 1:5. Therefore, now thus says the Lord of hosts: “Consider your ways carefully. Haggai 1:6. “You have sown much, but harvested little; you eat, but do not have enough; you drink, but are not filled; you clothe yourselves, but are not warm; and the one who earns wages works for a bag with holes. Haggai 1:7. “Thus says the Lord of hosts: ‘Consider your ways carefully.’ The prophet, with an address very customary for him to the people (v. 5, see v. 7), calls them to reflect on the consequences of the above-described (Hag 1:2) behavior of the people regarding the construction of the temple. The prophet speaks as if thus: “be guided by sound reasoning, be judges of your own undertakings, and know how much difference there is between zeal for the divine and neglect” (blessed Theodoret, p. 59). “Then he says that, scattering much seed, they harvested very little fruit, from which they always suffered hunger and thirst, and never were satisfied, but lived in poverty and were in distress, so that they did not have necessary clothing” (ibid.). “No labor of those who had set up their houses and neglectfully related to the house of God had success” (blessed Jerome, p. 325).

Haggai 1:8. “Go up to the mountain and bring wood and build the house; and I will take pleasure in it and be glorified, says the Lord. Now the prophet in direct and positive form expresses to the leaders of the people and to all the people a definite demand to take the decision to begin construction and proceed to work, the reward for which will be all success in their affairs, granted by God’s blessing. The requirement expressed in the first half of the verse has a general character of a call to begin construction work; therefore, there is no basis – neither in seeing in the mountain, Hebrew hagar, to which the prophet invites ascending, a definite mountain (the temple – Moriah, as some commentators supposed, or Mount Lebanon, as others thought), nor in perceiving in the call to carry wood an indication of the nature of the construction itself, that is, thinking that only wooden, forest material was needed, when, on the contrary, it is known (Hag 2:15; Ezra 4:4) that for the construction of the foundation and other parts of the second Jerusalem temple, much stone was required and used. Thus, the “mountain,” hagar, means in v. 8 a general, generic concept of a mountain and can be applied to each of the Palestinian mountains, which in that era still abounded in forest (Nehem 2:8), and “wood,” “forest,” Hebrew etz, expresses the idea of building material for the temple in general. The second half of v. 8 speaks of those saving, beneficial consequences that the people could expect from God’s favor toward it as a result of the change in or relationship to the important work of temple construction.

Haggai 1:9. “You expected much, but behold, it came to little; and when you brought it home, I blew it away. Why? says the Lord of hosts. Because of my house, which lies in ruins, while each of you hurries to his own house. Haggai 1:10. “Because of this the heavens above you have withheld the dew, and the earth has withheld its produce. Haggai 1:11. “And I have called for a drought on the land and on the mountains, on the grain, on the new wine, on the oil, on that which the ground brings forth, and on human beings and animals, and on all their labors. Having expressed in v. 8 a positive demand to the people – to begin the construction of the temple, the prophet now in the closing verses (9–11) of his first speech expresses his retrospective view of the failures already experienced by the Judeans and the true cause of them – neglect of the building of the temple. In this, the thought expressed by the prophet (v. 10, 11) on the dependence of the fertility or barrenness of the earth and the success or failure of human labor – a thought that is undoubtedly biblical (see Deut 28:22-23), rests on biblical teaching about God’s Providence, and therefore it will be equally correct whether to apply the content of the verses under consideration to the past or the future, as do, for example, blessed Jerome and blessed Theodoret. The latter conveys the content of the verses under consideration with such a paraphrase: “As you neglect the service of me, and apply much care to your own houses, so I will forbid the clouds to water the earth and will command the earth to become barren, and the punishing force, like a sword, I will turn not only on the fruits of the earth, but also on those who cultivate the earth, with them their livestock will suffer punishment, created by them for service. God of all things threatens to do this because of neglect of the house of God, not because he has need of it (the Creator of all things has no need even in heaven, he created all things for the sake of loving-kindness alone); but caring for them themselves, for their salvation, he commands that a temple be built, so that they, in the temple fulfilling the law, would draw benefit from this, and perform lawful worship, until, according to the word of the apostle, the Heir comes” (Rom 8:17) (p. 60).

Haggai 1:12. So Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, and Joshua, the son of Jozadak, the high priest, and all the remnant of the people, obeyed the voice of the Lord, their God, and the words of Haggai the prophet, since he was sent by the Lord, their God; and the people feared the Lord. Haggai 1:13. Then Haggai, the messenger of the Lord, spoke in the Lord’s message to the people, saying: “I am with you, says the Lord. Haggai 1:14. And the Lord stirred up the spirit of Zerubbabel, the son of Shealtiel, governor of Judea, and the spirit of Joshua, the son of Jozadak, the high priest, and the spirit of all the remnant of the people; and they came and did work on the house of the Lord of hosts, their God, Haggai 1:15. on the twenty-fourth day of the sixth month, in the second year of King Darius. The simple and artless, yet powerful and convincing speech of the prophet produced the desired effect not only on Zerubbabel and Joshua, but also on the entire mass of the people: by the designation: “all the remnant of the people,” Hebrew kol-sheerit ha’am, properly: “all the remnant of the people,” Vulgate: omnes reliquiae populi, – is meant “the entire collection of that part of the Hebrew nation which had returned from captivity and, in comparison with the former people and state, could indeed be called a ‘remnant’; this expression then became very common, a common term for designating (see Zech 8:6) the returned from captivity and generally those not destroyed in the Jerusalem catastrophe and in captivity” (Marti, p. 334). The word of the prophet Haggai exerted serious influence on all his listeners, causing them to think deeply about the revelation given through him. But this effect could not be identical in relation to Zerubbabel and Joshua, on the one hand, and – the people – on the other. “Pay careful attention,” says blessed Jerome, “to the fact that in accordance with the twofold type of the Savior in the person of Zerubbabel-leader and Joshua-priest (for he himself is both King and High Priest), the book does not say: ‘Zerubbabel and Joshua were afraid,’ but it is said that although Zerubbabel, Joshua, and the people heeded the words of the prophet Haggai, which are the words of the Lord, nevertheless, on behalf of the Lord, only the people were afraid, that is, only the crowd, not yet turned into a perfect man” (p. 333). In response to the fear and confusion of the people (v. 12b) and in prevention of further wavering on its part in the work of temple construction, the prophet Haggai solemnly announces to the people consolation and encouragement on behalf of Yah, as if saying to the people: “Do not lose courage; I am your helper and assistant” (blessed Theodoret, p. 61). The extraordinary importance of the moment, the necessity to at once raise the spirit of the people, explains also a somewhat unusual in Scripture designation of the prophet as an Angel of the Lord, Hebrew malakh Yah (the use of this term in application to the prophets cannot be considered wholly exceptional in Scripture; on the contrary, all prophets in general are named Angels in 2 Chr 36:15-16; see Isa 44:26). We have already spoken in the introduction to our commentary about the unacceptability of the widespread explanation in Christian antiquity of Hag 1:13 in the sense of an indication of the angelic nature of the prophet. The exhortations and encouragement of the prophet, and then the special, deliberate action of God to raise the spirit of the temple builders, v. 14, finally overcame all wavering of the people in the work of temple construction, and it actively began work on its construction, so that the beginning of the resumption of these works is named in v. 15 as the 24th day of the sixth month, that is, the construction of the temple was resumed only three weeks after the first appearance of the prophet Haggai (see Hag 1:1). * * * Blessed Jerome (p. 317–313) renders the meaning of Hebrew Daryavesh nominally. “Generationes factae, births that occurred.” The philological validity of this translation is more than questionable, but blessed Jerome in this case had in mind those moral-allegorical conclusions which he made from the mentioned translation