INTRODUCTION TO THE

BOOK OF HAGGAI

Pastor William E. Wenstrom Jr.

WENSTROM BIBLE MINISTRIES 
 Marion, Iowa
ã 2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
 Introduction to the Book of Haggai

Overview

The book of Haggai next to Obadiah is the shortest book in the Old Testament.
It deals with the God of Israel using the prophet Haggai to issue four messages to
the remnant of Jews who returned from the Babylonian captivity. The purpose of
these messages was to encourage this remnant to complete the rebuilding of the
temple in Jerusalem which was destroyed by the third and final Babylonian
invasion in 586 B.C. These messages were delivered over a period of fourth
months in 520 B.C. during the second year of the Persian king Darius Hystaspes
(522-486 B.C.). They were delivered to this postexilic community 18 years after
their initial return from Babylon.
There are three main characters in the book of Haggai. First, there is Darius
Hystaspes, the king of the Persian empire which was the superpower of the ancient
world at the end of the sixth century B.C. He is also mentioned in Ezra 5 and
Zechariah 1. The second main character is Zerubbabel who was the leader of the
Jewish exiles from Babylon and the governor of Judah. His name means “offspring
of Babylon” which strongly suggests he was born in Babylon during the exile. He
is also mentioned in Ezra 2:2 and Zechariah 4:6. Lastly, there is Joshua who was
the high priest and was thus responsible for leading nation in the worship of
Yahweh. He shared the leadership responsibilities with Zerubbabel. He is also
mentioned in Ezra 2:2 and Zechariah 3:1.

Canonicity

The book of Haggai immediately attained canonical status among the Jews. The
term “canon” or “canonicity” in Christianity refers to a collection of many books
acknowledged or recognized by the early church as inspired by God. Both Jews
and Christians possess canons of Scripture. We must remember that the first
Christians did not possess a New Testament canon but rather they relied on the
gospel that was being proclaimed to them by the apostles and others. They also
relied on the books of the Old Testament canon. The Jewish canon consists of
thirty-nine books while on the other hand the Christian canon consists of sixty-six
for Protestants and seventy-three for Catholics. The Protestant canon has thirty-
nine Old Testament books like the Jews and twenty-seven works compose the New
Testament.
The term English term “canon” comes from the Greek noun kanōn (κανών)
which etymologically is a Semitic loanword and was most likely from the Hebrew
qāneh and Akkadian, qaň. The Greek noun kanōn originally meant “reed” but then
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 1
later came to mean “measuring reed” and thus “rule, standard, norm.” The term
literally means: (1) a straight rod or bar; (2) a measuring rule as a ruler used by
masons and carpenters; then (3) a rule or standard for testing straightness.
The term kanōn was employed six times in the Greek New Testament (2 Cor.
10:13, 15-16; Gal. 6:16; Phlp. 3:16). In 2 Corinthians 10:13, 15-16, the word
speaks of a set of directions for an activity and is used of the sphere that God
allotted to Paul for his work as a missionary. Paul uses the word in Galatians 6:16
where it means “rule, standard” referring to the means to determine the quality of
the Christian’s conduct.
The early patristic writers would use the word many times in the sense of “rule”
or “standard.” During the first three centuries, the noun kanōn was used of those
doctrines which were accepted as the rule of faith and practice in the Christian
church. Eventually, from about 300 A.D. onwards, the term was applied to the
decisions or decrees or regulations of the church councils or synods as rules by
which Christians were to live by.
By the fourth century though, the term came to refer to the list of books that
constitute the Old and New Testaments. In other words, it was used for the
catalogue or list of sacred books which were distinguished and honored as
belonging to God’s inspired Word. This is how the word is used today by
Christians meaning it refers to the closed collection of documents that constitute
authoritative Scripture.
The Jewish community recognized thirty-nine books as canonical. This
corresponds to the number accepted by the apostolic church and by Protestant
churches since the time of the Reformation. The Roman Catholic church adds
fourteen other books which composed the Apocrypha. They consider these books
as having equal authority with the Old Testament books.
The critical consensus of the past two centuries was that the Old Testament
came to be canonically recognized in three steps and until recently this has gone
relatively unchallenged. First of all, there is the Torah meaning the first five books
of our English Bible which is also called the Pentateuch. It achieved canonical
status in Israel toward the end of the fifth century B.C. The writings of the
Prophets also achieved similar status about 200 B.C. and the Writings only toward
the end of the first century A.D. at the Council of Jamnia or Jabne. However, this
is not accepted by everyone in critical scholarship. There is no longer wide
acceptance of the role of the Council of Jamnia in determining the Hebrew canon.
This council did discuss the merits of Ecclesiastes but in no way did they decide
what was canonical or not.
The Hebrew Scriptures were recognized as authoritative at their inception and
were immediately accepted as such by the Jewish people. The acceptance of the
Pentateuch, for example, is recorded in Deuteronomy 32:46-47, and in Joshua 1:7,
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 2
8. As a matter of course, the church of the first century regarded the Hebrew
Scriptures as inspired. Jesus, in Luke 24:44, refers to the Law, the prophets, and
the psalms (or the writings) as divinely authoritative and canonical.
Jerusalem and the Temple had been destroyed and the Jews had gone into the
Babylonian captivity (2 Ch. 36:11-21), and during their captivity (586-516 B.C.)
the Jews realized why they had disintegrated as a nation. This led to the resurgence
of the study of the Word of God. At last the Jews became aware of the importance
of the written Word as a part of their spiritual heritage-so much so, that we have
extra-Biblical evidence with regard to their consciousness of the canon as it then
existed.
There were men like Ezra, Nehemiah, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, who
kept reminding the people of the importance of the Scriptures. There were other
outstanding leaders like Joshua the high priest and Zerubbabel, who led the
advance column out of captivity back to Jerusalem. They all recognized that they
had the canon.
Jesus Christ Himself endorsed the canon (Luke 11:51; Mt. 23:36) which takes
us from Genesis 4:10 to 2 Chronicles 24:20-21. Chronicles was the last book in the
Hebrew Canon. The earliest extant Christian list of Old Testament books was
recorded by Melito, bishop of Sardis in A.D. 170. This list does not mention
Lamentations (which was usually understood to be part of the book of Jeremiah),
or Nehemiah, which was normally appended to Ezra. The only other omission was
the book of Esther which could have been grouped with Ezra and Nehemiah. The
late fourth century writer Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis in Cyprus, quoted another
ancient list from the second century which included all the books corresponding to
our thirty-nine, except Lamentations, which was probably considered an appendix
to Jeremiah. Origen (A.D. 185-254) also provided a list of the Old Testament
books in use corresponding to what we now accept as the Old Testament.
The Talmud is the written opinion of the Rabbis recorded from 400 B.C. to 500
A.D. over a period of nearly 900 years. The word Talmud comes from another
Hebrew word lamad meaning “to teach.” Throughout the Talmud there was always
canonicity-consciousness. Then there is Eusebius who was a famous historian of
the Patristic era (fourth century A.D.) who stated that the entire Old Testament was
recognized and accepted in his day. Tertullian who was another famous historian
of that same era and one of the Patristic writers concurred but included Esther in
the Old Testament Canon whereas Eusebius did not.
The accuracy of the present-day Hebrew version of the Old Testament is a
result of the fastidious care with which the Sopherim and the Masoretes
transmitted it. The Sopherim copied manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures from
about 300 B.C. until A.D. 500. According to the Talmud, they came to be called
Sopherim because, in their endeavor to preserve the text from alteration or
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 3
addition, they counted the number of words in each section of Scripture, as well as
the number of verses and paragraphs.
During this time, there were two general classes of manuscript copies, the
synagogue rolls and private copies. Even the private copies, or “common copies”
of the Old Testament text, which were not used in public meetings, were preserved
with great care. For the synagogue rolls, however, there was a very elaborate set of
rules for the copyists. The manuscript had to be prepared by a Jew, written on the
skins of clean animals and fastened together with strings taken from clean animals.
Every skin was to contain a certain number of columns, equal throughout the
codex. The length of each column was to be no less than 48 and no more than 60
lines. The breadth was to be 30 letters. The ink was to be prepared according to a
definite special recipe. An authentic copy was to be used from which to copy, and
the transcriber was not to deviate from it in the least. No word or letter, not even a
yod, was to be written from memory. The scribe was to examine carefully the
codex to be copied. Between all of the consonants of the new copy, a space of at
least the thickness of a hair or thread had to intervene. Between every parashah, or
section, there was to be a breadth of nine consonants. Between every book, there
was to be three lines.
During the period A.D. 500-900, the text of the Hebrew Bible was standardized
by the Masoretes, who were also very careful in the transmission of the text. They
counted every letter and marked the middle letter and middle word of each book,
of the Pentateuch and of the whole Hebrew Bible, and counted all parashas
(sections), verses, and words for every book. These procedures were a
manifestation of the great respect they had for the sacred Scriptures and secured
their minute attention to the precise transmission of the text. The Masoretes also
introduced a complete system of vowel pointings and punctuation for the text.
Because of their high regard for faithfulness to the text in transmission, wherever
they felt that corrections or improvements should be made, they placed them in the
margin. They retained certain marks of the earlier scribes relating to doubtful
words and offered various possibilities as to what they were. Among the many lists
they drew up was one containing all the words that occur only twice in the Old
Testament.
The canon of Scripture was, of course, being formed as each book was written,
and it was complete when the last book was finished. When we speak of the
“formation” of the canon we actually mean the recognition of the canonical books.
This took time. Some assert that all the books of the Old Testament canon were
collected and recognized by Ezra in the fifth century b.c. References by Josephus
(a.d. 95) and in 2 Esdras 14 (a.d. 100) indicate the extent of the Old Testament
canon as the thirty-nine books we know today. The discussions by the teaching-
house at Jamnia (a.d. 70–100) seemed to assume this existing canon.
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 4
 Jesus delimited the extent of the canonical books of the Old Testament when He
accused the scribes of being guilty of slaying all the prophets God had sent Israel
from Abel to Zacharias (Lk 11:51). The account of Abel’s death is, of course, in
Genesis; that of Zacharias is in 2 Chronicles 24:20–21, which is the last book in
the order of the books in the Hebrew Bible (not Malachi as in our English Bibles).
Therefore, it is as if the Lord had said, “Your guilt is recorded all through the Bible
—from Genesis to Malachi.” Notice that He did not include any of the apocryphal
books which were in existence at that time and which contained the accounts of
other martyrs.
Now, it is important to remember that certain books were canonical even before
any tests were put to them. No church nor church council made any book of the
Old or New Testament canonical or authentic. The book was either authentic or it
was not when it was written. Ancient Israel and the church or its councils
recognized and verified certain books as the Word of God, and in time those so
recognized were collected together in what we now call the Bible. What tests did
the church apply?
J. Hampton Keathley III writes “Specific tests to consider canonicity may be
recognized. (1) Did the book indicate God was speaking through the writer and
that it was considered authoritative? Compare the following references: (a) God
was speaking through the human author—Ex. 20:1; Josh. 1:1; Isa. 2:1; (b) that the
books were authoritative—Joshua 1:7-8; 23:6; 1 Kings 2:3; 2 Kings 14:6; 21:8;
23:25; Ezra 6:18; Nehemiah 13:1; Daniel 9:11; Malachi 4:4. Note also Joshua 6:26
compared with 1 Kings 16:34; Joshua 24:29-33 compared with Judges 2:8-9; 2
Chronicles 36:22-23 compared with Ezra 1:1-4; Daniel 9:2 compared with
Jeremiah 25:11-12. (2) Was the human author recognized as a spokesman of God,
that is, was he a prophet or did he have the prophetic gift? Compare Deuteronomy
18:18; 31:24-26; 1 Samuel 10:25; Nehemiah 8:3. (3) Was the book historically
accurate? Did it reflect a record of actual facts? There are a number of important
historical evidences drawn from the ancient writings that give support to the Old
Testament canon as we have it in our Protestant Bible. 1. Prologue to
Ecclesiasticus. This noncanonical book refers to a threefold division of books
(namely, the Law, the Prophets, and hymns and precepts for human conduct)
which was known by the writer’s grandfather (which would be around 200 B.C.).
2. Philo. Philo (around A D. 40) referred to the same threefold division. 3.
Josephus. Josephus (A. D. 37-100) said that the Jews held as sacred only twenty-
two books (which include exactly the same as our present thirty-nine books of the
Old Testament). 4. Jamnia. Jamnia (A. D. 90), was a teaching house of rabbis who
discussed canonicity. Some questioned whether it was right to accept (as was being
done) Esther, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. These discussions concerned
an existing canon. 5. The church fathers. The church fathers accepted the thirty-
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 5
nine books of the Old Testament. The only exception was Augustine (A. D. 400)
who included the books of the Apocrypha (those “extra” books that some Bibles
include between the books of the Old and New Testaments). However, he did
acknowledge that they were not fully authoritative. The books of the Apocrypha
were not officially recognized as part of the canon until the Council of Trent (A.D.
1546) and then only by the Roman Catholic church. 1 New Testament Evidence for
the Canonicity of the Old Testament: (1) Old Testament quotations in the New.
There are some 250 quotes from Old Testament books in the New Testament.
None are from the Apocrypha. All Old Testament books are quoted except Esther,
Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Solomon. (2) Old Testament quotations by Jesus
Christ. In Matthew 5:17-18, the Lord declared that the Law and the Prophets, a
reference that includes all of the Old Testament, then summarized as “the Law” in
verse 18, would be fulfilled. This declared it was therefore God’s authoritative
Word. Christ’s statement in Matthew 23:35 about the blood (murder) of Abel to
the blood of Zechariah clearly defined what Jesus viewed as the Old Testament
canon. It consisted of the entire Old Testament as we know it in our Protestant
English Bible. This is particularly significant in view of the fact there other
murders of God’s messengers recorded in the Apocrypha, but the Lord excludes
them suggesting He did not consider the books of the Apocrypha to belong in the
Canon as with the books from Genesis to 2 Chronicles. The above evidence shows
the books of the Old Testament, as we have them in our Protestant Bible, were God
breathed and therefore authoritative and profitable the very moment they were
written. ‘There was human recognition of the writings; normally this was
immediate as the people recognized the writers as spokesmen from God. Finally,
there was a collection of the books into a canon.’2”3
As we can see from these authors, one of the tests used to determine whether a
book was part of the canon of the Old and New Testaments was inspired
authorship. An inspired prophet could be identified using the tests for prophets in
Deuteronomy 13:1-5; 18:14-22. Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Ex. 17:14; 24:4-7;
34:27; Deut. 31:9,22,24; Ezra 7:6; Ps. 103:7; Josh. 8:31, 23:6; I Kings 2:3). Some
prophets clearly state that they were ordered to write (Jer. 30:2; Ezek. 43:11; Is.
8:1). Each of the twelve Minor Prophets call themselves prophets. The historical
books were written by prophets (I Chron. 29:29; II Chron. 9:29; 12:15; 13:22;
20:34; 32:32; 33:19). Daniel accepted the book of Jeremiah as scripture (Dan. 9:2).
Joshua received Moses' writing as scripture (Josh. 1:26). Isaiah and Micah
accepted each other's writings as scripture contemporaneously (Is. 2:2-4; Micah

1
Charles C. Ryrie, Basic Theology, Victor Books, Wheaton, IL, 1987, electronic media.
2
Bibliology, The Doctrine of the Written Word, Biblical Studies Press 1997; www.bible.org. pages 29-30.
3
Bibliology, The Doctrine of the Written Word, Biblical Studies Press 1997; www.bible.org. pages 29-30.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 6

4:1-4). Solomon, Samuel, Daniel, Isaiah and Ezekiel all had dreams and visions,
which squares with God’s description of a prophet (Deut. 13:1; Num. 12:6-8).
The New Testament quotes the Old Testament over 600 times (all of the Old
Testament books are quoted except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and
Song of Solomon). Acts 2:30 and Matthew 24:15 identify David and Daniel as
prophets. Therefore, only Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther are unproven if Ecclesiastes
and Song of Solomon were written by Solomon. Melito, Origen and Jerome agreed
with the Jewish canon. Only Augustine and his councils accepted apocryphal
books.
Therefore, the question is not where a book received its divine authority
because that can only come from God. Rather the question should be how did men
recognize that authority? So, canonicity is recognized by men of God. Inspiration
determines canonicity. If a book was authoritative, it was so because God breathed
it and made it so. A book received authority from God. How men recognize that
authority is another matter altogether. Therefore, the reason there are only sixty-six
books in the canon is that God only inspired sixty-six books!
Now, as we noted, Haggai is the first of the postexilic prophets and as we also
noted, the tenth of the twelve minor prophets. It is also place in the correct
chronological order in the Old Testament which is unlike many books in the Bible.
The divine origin of Haggai and thus its canonical authority were recognized in
Israel from the time of its composition. Specifically, it was immediately recognized
as canonical among the faithful remnant in Israel. Thus, the canonicity of the book
of Haggai has never been questioned.

Authorship

Although the prophet Haggai is not identified as the author of the book which
bears his name, unanimous tradition assigns it to him. Both Jewish and Christian
interpreters assign the prophet Haggai as the author of this book. Furthermore, this
is not an unreasonable conclusion since the contents of the book provide evidence
that this is the case. It is only the last century that the authenticity of particular
parts of the book of Haggai have been seriously questioned by scholars. G. A.
Smith, writing in 1898, could say, “The authenticity of all these four sections [of
Haggai] was doubted by no one, till ten years ago” (The Book of the Twelve
Prophets Commonly Called the Minor, 2d ed., EBC (London: Hodder & Stoughton,
1898), 2:226.4

C
EBC Expositor’s Bible Commentary
4
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 7

 Richard Taylor writes “Most scholars seem willing to grant the genuineness of
much of the material found in the Book of Haggai. 5 But some have concluded that
the issue of authorship for the book should be approached with a two-tier
understanding. In this approach a core of genuine material from the prophet was
later edited and expanded by an otherwise unknown individual who probably
belonged to a circle of the prophet’s disciples. Redditt maintains that on the one
hand we find in this book an echo of the genuine voice of Haggai himself. But on
the other hand, the book in its present shape is the work of a later editor or redactor
who molded Haggai’s message into the book as we now know it. Referring to this
putative editor, Redditt says, ‘It is through his eyes that the reader sees Haggai.’ 6
According to this view, the redactor added the dates that preface each of the four
messages in the book, as well as providing certain information with regard to
people and events. Other scholars have attempted to identify the affinities of the
supposed editor of Haggai. Beuken associates the editorial framework of Haggai
and Zechariah 1–8 with the community of the Chronicler, suggesting that in their
final form these books originated in what he calls a Chronisitic milieu, 7 whereas
Mason sees influence from the deuteronomic writings, from Ezekiel, and from the
P source of the Torah.8 But even if one were to grant that such views may have
merit, it is difficult to see how the different contributions to the form of the book as
we now have it could be objectively identified and disentangled from one another.
Modern attempts to separate the editorial narrative in Haggai from the prophetic
speeches found in the book must be regarded as a questionable enterprise, as Floyd
has recently pointed out. It is, as he says, ‘a misconceived quest for an illusory
goal.’9 Lack of an objective means by which the allegedly disparate materials may
be identified and sorted out poses a serious methodological problem. There is
nothing in the book that requires the conclusion that a later disciple collected the
memoirs of a revered teacher or mentor, although one could point to the Book of
Jeremiah as a biblical precedent of similar activity. Bentzen is among those who
lean toward such a view of the composition of Haggai, 10 but his arguments in
defense of it are few and unconvincing. Tollington makes a stronger case for
thinking that the words of the prophet were brought together, perhaps before the
building of the temple was finished, by the prophet Zechariah (or one of his
5
Archer’s confidence requires some nuancing in order to be precise (G. L. Archer Jr., A Survey of Old Testament Introduction, rev. ed. [Chicago:
Moody, 1994], 469). See also J. H. Raven, Old Testament Introduction, General and Special (London and Edinburgh: Revell, 1910), 239. That
the date of the historical circumstances of the book is 520 B.C. is clear enough. But whether the book in its present form dates to 520 is a matter of
dispute among many scholars.
6
P. L. Redditt, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, NCB (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans; London: Marshall Pickering, 1995), 11.
7
Beuken, Haggai, Sacharja 1–8, 27–48, 80–83. Beuken’s conclusion concerning a Chronistic milieu for the editor of Haggai is adopted by many
other scholars, including, e.g., Nogalski (see Literary Precursors, 216–17, 236, n. 61).
8
R. A. Mason, “The Purpose of the ‘Editorial Framework’ of the Book of Haggai,” VT 27 (1977): 413–21.
9
M. H. Floyd, “The Nature of the Narrative and the Evidence of Redaction in Haggai,” VT 45 (1995): 479.
10
A. Bentzen, Introduction to the Old Testament, 2 vols. (Copenhagen: Gads, 1949), 1:156.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 8

disciples), who placed Haggai’s sermons with a narrative framework. 11 She also
allows for subsequent redactional activity that shaped the book in keeping with
certain political or theological concerns. Kessler, who dates the book prior to the
completion of the temple, concludes that it was produced either by an individual
associate or by a circle of disciples who were close to the prophet. 12 In the
nineteenth-century the French commentator André put forth a novel suggestion
concerning the name of the Book of Haggai. He thought that this book was
originally anonymous and that the name Haggai, which means ‘festal,’ was given
to it in light of the observation that its discourses are dated on Israelite feast days. 13
He concluded that the name referred not to a particular person but instead had only
symbolic value for calling attention to the celebratory occasions on which the
messages were first delivered. A complication for this view, however, is the fact
that the reference in Hag 2:18 to the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month cannot
be linked to an Israelite feast, as André himself acknowledged. Furthermore, the
references in this book to Haggai as ‘the prophet’ seem to suggest an individual
whose identity the recipients of the book were expected to recognize. This view
does not provide an adequate explanation for the name associated with this book. 14
The possibility that the Book of Haggai was compiled by one or more of the
prophet’s disciples cannot be ruled out with certainty. On the other hand, it is not a
necessary conclusion.15 The easier explanation, and one that adequately accounts
for the internal features of the book, is that it was the prophet Haggai himself who
essentially authored the entirety of the book. The fact that the author speaks of
Haggai only in the third person need not necessarily exclude Haggai as the
author,16 since this is a common literary technique in antiquity. 17 It may be, as

11
J. E. Tollington, Tradition and Innovation in Haggai and Zechariah 1–8, JSOTSup 150 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), 23, 180; also “Readings
in Haggai: From the Prophet to the Completed Book, a Changing Message in Changing Times,” in The Crisis of Israelite Religion:
Transformation of Religious Tradition in Exilic and Post-Exilic Times, OtSt, vol. 42 (Leiden: Brill, 1999), 196.
12
See J. Kessler, The Book of Haggai: Prophecy and Society in Early Persian Yehud, VTSup 91 (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 278.
13
See T. André, Le prophète Aggée: Introduction critique et commentaire (Paris: Librairie Fischbacher, 1895), 8.
14
The same negative conclusion is reached, e.g., by Tollington; see Tradition and Innovation, 48, n. 2.
15
Motyer somewhat overstates the case for Haggai’s authorship of the book when he suggests that “it seems almost perverse to deny Haggai
such an obvious task as committing his oracles to writing” (“Haggai,” 968).
16
But this point is not conceded by all. B. S. Childs, e.g., says, “The reference to Haggai in the third person, as well as the structuring of his
oracles, makes it obvious that the book has been edited by someone other than the prophet himself” ( Introduction to the Old Testament as
Scripture [Philadelphia: Fortress, 1979], 467). So also R. Mason: “We must attribute it [i.e., the third person of reported speech] to the circle of
tradition in which the deeds and words of Haggai were remembered and passed on” ( The Books of Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, CBC
[Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1977], 8). Likewise, E. Achtemeier says, “Because the prophet is referred to in the third person in the
dated introductions, in the report (1:12), and in the abbreviated introduction (2:13, 14), it is clear that the book was put together by an editorial
hand” (Nahum—Malachi, IBC [Atlanta: John Knox, 1986], 94).
17
Contrary to Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, 29–30. Baldwin says, “The dated introductions (1:1; 2:1, 10, 20), the narrative (1:12), and
the abbreviated introductions (2:13, 14) all refer to Haggai in the third person, suggesting that someone other than the prophet was responsible for
putting the book together.”

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 9

Eissfeldt suggests, that the third person rather than the first was chosen by the
prophet to emphasize the objectivity of the account.18”19
Eugene Merrill writes “Scholarly consensus maintains that the book of Haggai
was written by its attributive author except, perhaps, for editorial frameworks and
minor later interpolations. The delimitation of such frameworks has been most
thoroughly carried out by W. A. M. Beuken and Rex A. Mason. Mason, in a
sympathetic treatment of Beuken’s work (though he plays down Beuken’s
suggestion about a ‘Chronistic’ influence on Haggai), identifies the ‘editorial
framework’ as 1:1, 3, 12, 13a, 14, 15; 2:1, 2 (probably), 10, 20. 20 Haggai himself is
unknown except for his writing and two references to him in Ezra (5:1; 6:14). His
name in Hebrew (haggay) means ‘my feast’ or the like, possibly because he was
born on a festival day (hag). Though he is the only Haggai of the Bible, related
forms such as Haggi (Gen 46:16), Haggit (2 Sam. 3:4), and Haggiah (1 Chron.
6:30) suggest that it was a popular name. In addition, it is attested in Hebrew seals
of the postexilic period and in Phoenician, South Arabic, and Aramaic sources.
Names associated with festival days as propitious occasions for birth find parallels
in Egyptian and Akkadian texts as well.21 The book of Haggai consists of four
addresses of the prophet (Hag. 1:1-15, 2:1-9, 10-19, 20-23), the first of which has
two parts (1:1-11, 12-15). This structure will receive attention presently, but for
now it is important to consider various viewpoints as to the origin and growth of
the composition. First, it is generally agreed that Haggai himself is responsible for
the bulk of the material and that he arranged it according to four addresses set off
by chronological notations (1:1, 15; 2:1; 10, 20). But a difficulty already emerges
since the second oracle, 1:12-15, is followed and not preceded by the chronological
datum, as is the case with the other three. To resolve this anomaly, some scholars
have proposed that 1:15 should be divided, with 15b joined to 2:1, to create the full
formula of year, month, and day.22 Thus 1:15b—2:1 precedes what then becomes
the second oracle (1:15b—2:9). The remainder of 1:15 would be left suspended
unless it is recognized that 2:10-19 consists of two fundamentally different
messages, 2:10-14 and 2:15-19. J. W. Rothstein, on the basis of Ezra 4:1-5,
identified ‘this people’ of 2:14 with the Samaritans, supporting a date of three
months after the laying of the temple foundations (2:10). Haggai 2:15-19, however,
18
O. Eissfeldt, The Old Testament: An Introduction (New York: Harper & Row, 1965), 428. It must be admitted, however, that Eissfeldt’s
opinion on this matter has not found much acceptance on the part of other OT specialists. A possible exception is Soggin, who says, “But we
cannot exclude the possibility that the prophet wrote in the third person to give the impression of greater objectivity” (Introduction, 325).
19
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 50–52). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.
20
W. A. M. Beuken, Haggai-Sacharja 1-8 (Assen: van Gorcum, 1967), 28-83; Rex A. Mason, “The Purpose of the ‘Editorial Framework’ of the
Book of Haggai,” VT 27 (1977): 414. A strong case for the unity of the book, especially in response to the arguments of T. Andr (Le Prophete
Agge, 1895) to the contrary, may be found in H. G. Mitchell, A Commentary on Haggai and Zechariah, ICC (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912),
28-30. For evidence of the homogeneity of Haggai from a profile of vocabulary frequency, see Yehuda T. Radday and Moshe A. Pollatschek,
“Vocabulary Richness in Post-Exilic Prophetic Books,” ZAW 92 (1980): 333-46.
21
Hans Walter Wolff, Dodekapropheton 6. Haggai, BKAT (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1986), 2.
22
So already the LXX, VL, Vg, Syriac, followed by BHK.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 10

seems to fit the subject matter of 1:1-11, a period before or at the very beginning of
the construction. The chronology of 1:15a should then introduce 2:15-19, requiring
a transposition of 2:15-19 and 2:10-14 (and 2:1-9).23 Eissfeldt24proposes that
the twenty-fourth day of 2:18 resulted from carelessness on the part of the redactor
who placed that day in the ninth month, in line with 2:10, rather than in the sixth
month as the chronological introduction of 1:15a required. The issues raised in this
analysis will receive detailed attention in the commentary, but it is important that
the linchpin of the difficulty, the apparent dislocation of 1:15, be explained now
since discussion of the arrangement of the book depends on it. The following
points should be considered. (1) Haggai 1:1-15 is one long address subdivided into
1:1-11 and 1:12-15. In light of this, the prophet clearly would want to avoid
interrupting his discourse with a chronological note before the second part; hence,
he placed it at the end as a kind of inclusio with 1:1 (both second year, sixth
month). (2) The absence of a reference to a year in 2:1 leads one to suspect that the
‘second year’ of 1:15b is doing double duty.25 It provides a year for 1:12-15 and
one for 2:1-9 at the same time. The structure is day, month, year (1:15), month, day
(2:1). (3) There is no ancient manuscript variation from the traditional order. The
scroll of the minor prophets from the caves of Murabba ‘at, which contains 1:15,
shows no evidence of a different tradition.26 The LXX does combine 1:15 with 2:1,
separating v. 15 from the section 1:12-15, but this only leads to a confusing
blending of mutually exclusive data. The second oracle (2:1-9) could not have been
delivered on both the twenty-fourth day of the sixth month and the twenty-first day
of the seventh month. This, of course, is one reason that most scholars separate
1:15 into two parts to begin with, connecting v. 15a to 2:15-19 and allowing v.
15b to provide the year as part of the regular formula for 2:1. Recently H. W.
Wolff has dealt with the composition of Haggai by proposing three ‘growth rings’
in the transmission of the accounts. 27 The center he calls the ‘prophetic
proclamation’ delivered on the prophet’s five appearances (1:4-11; 2:15-19; 2:3-9;
2:14; 2:21b-23). These, he says, were probably collected by a circle of disciples
and placed within ‘sketches of scenes.’ The second ring of material consists of
such matters as the history of Haggai’s effect on his listeners (1:12b-13), the
history that preceded his addresses (2:11-13), and the opposition he elicited (1:2).
The outer ring, created by the ‘Haggai chronicler,’ provides introductory

23
J. W. Rothstein, Juden und Samaritaner: Die grundlegende Scheidung von Judentum und Heidentum, BWANT 3 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1908),
cited by Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi, 112. The demarcation and sequence of the sections accepted by most critical scholars are
those of F. Horst: 1:1-14; 1:15a-2:15-19; 1:15b-2:9; 2:10-14; 2:20-23. See F. Horst, Die zwlf kleinen Propheten Nahum bis Maleachi (Tübingen:
Verlag von J. C. B. Mohr, 1964), 204-9.
24
Otto Eissfeldt, The Old Testament. An Introduction (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1965), 427.
25
Thus A. S. van der Woude, Haggai, Maleachi (Nijkerk: Callenbach, 1982), cited by Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi, 93.
26
P. Benoit, J. T. Milik, and R. de Vaux, Discoveries in the Judaean Desert. II. Les Grottes de Murabba’at. Texte (Oxford: Clarendon 1960), 203-
5.
27
Wolff, Haggai, 3-4.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 11

information such as setting and chronology (1:1-3; 1:15a; 1:15b—2:2; 2:10; 2:20-
21a). In addition, Wolff sees other accretions to the work of the chronicler: the
interpolations of 2:5a, 17; the last two words of 2:18; and the first four words of
2:19ab; and LXX expansions at the end of 2:9, 14, 21, 22ba.28 Though justification
for seeing different hands at work between the Haggai core and the contribution of
the ‘chronicler’ must await detailed treatment in the commentary, Wolff is no
doubt correct in his general view of some redactionary process, but his efforts to
isolate its stages and the specific contributions of each hand smack of the kind of
special pleading inherent in source analysis of any kind. There is nothing in the
style, form, vocabulary, and content of the book of Haggai that precludes it from
having come entirely as it stands from the prophet himself. 29 In his insistence on
such a pattern of growth, Wolff is in line with much recent critical scholarship that
posits two major ideological traditions in Haggai—that of the oracles and that of
the editorial framework. The message of the former (i.e., of Haggai himself) is that
the blessing of God depends on the building of the temple. The message of the
(later) framework is in line with the theocratic emphasis of P on the continuation of
the covenant community in the present and future with little or no eschatological
element. Such bifurcation of traditions (and of the composition of the book itself)
has little or no objective basis but has been developed primarily as a reflex of an
alleged division in postexilic Judaism between a visionary eschatological party and
a practical hierocratic party, a view which itself has no clear-cut warrant in the
biblical accounts.30”31

The Prophet Haggai

The life and ministry of Haggai are a mystery since the Scriptures do not
identify his parentage or genealogy. In fact, there are only two references to him
outside of his own book (cf. Ezra 5:1; 6:14). He is also alluded to in Zechariah 8:9.
This sets him apart from most of the prophets of Israel since most provide in their
prophecies a personal genealogy or geographical origin or royal contemporaries
(Isa 1:1; Jer 1:1–3; Ezek 1:1–3; Hos 1:1; Joel 1:1; Amos 1:1; Jonah 1:1; Mic 1:1;
Nah 1:1; Zeph 1:1; Zech 1:1.). Thus, the book of Haggai is similar to the books of
Obadiah, Habakkuk and Malachi. We also have no idea of when and where he
died. It would appear that he was not exiled to Babylon or was born during this
28
As suggested above, the hypothesis of a “Chronistic Milieu” for Haggai and Zechariah 1-8, stressing strong affinities between the books of
Chronicles and Ezra-Nehemiah and these two prophets, was developed especially by Beuken, (Haggai-Sacharja 1-8). For a brief review of his
analysis see Coggins, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, 27-29.
29
Thus essentially Eissfeldt, The Old Testament, An Introduction, 428-29.
30
For a survey of the matter see Rex Mason, “The Prophets of the Restoration,” Israel’s Prophetic Tradition, ed. R. Coggins, A. Phillips, M.
Knibb (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ., 1982), 140-45. See also Introduction to Zechariah in this volume.
31
Merrill, Eugene H., An Exegetical Commentary: Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; www.bible.org.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 12

captivity since his name is not provided in the list of returnees found in Ezra 2.
However, this is not itself sufficient ground for making this conclusion.
Richard Tayler writes “It would seem that this absence of family connection for
the prophet is intentional, serving the literary purpose of underscoring the
prophet’s divine commissioning as a representative of the Lord. What was most
important to the author of this book was not Haggai’s human connections or his
line of family descent. Rather, it was the divine authority that provided the basis of
his urgent word to Jews who had returned from exile in Babylon.”32
Haggai’s name means “festive” or “festal,” which derived from the Hebrew
word ḥāḡ (“a festival”). Some scholars believe the name means “my feast,” while
others the ending as being Aramaic. There are those who believe the name is an
abbreviation of the name “Haggiah,” which means “Yahweh’s feast.” Still others
contend that the name indicates that the prophet was born on a feast day. There are
at least nine individuals in the Old Testament who are attested who are attested on
seals with this name.
H.W. Wolff writes that “Haggai was a favorite name in the Old Testament
world. We have evidence of this from Hebrew seals, Aramaic sources, and also
Akkadian and Egyptian parallels (see p. 37 below). The reason why the name was
so widespread was its meaning: to be born on a feast day (‫ )חַג‬counted as a good
omen. The name echoes the rejoicing over the child’s birth: ‘My feast-day’s joy!’
(see p. 37 below).”33
Mignon Jacobs writes “The name ḥaggay, ‘Haggai,’ is derived from ḥaǥ,
meaning ‘feast, festival.’ For this reason ḥaggî (“my feasts”) has been compared
with malʾākî (“my messenger”) as a symbolic title.34 One explanation for this
rendering is that the prophecies in Haggai are all dated to festival days: the new
moon and Feast of Tabernacles.35 Likewise, comparisons of the name Haggai with
other names indicating a day of birth are noteworthy—for example, šabbətay,
‘born on the Sabbath,’ Shabbethai (Ezra 10:15; Neh 8:7). 36 Several variations of
the name appear in the Old Testament: ḥaggî, used of the descendants of Gad (Gen
46:16; Num 26:15); ḥaggît, the father of Adonijah (2 Sam 3:4; 1 Kgs 1:5, 11; 2:13;
1 Chr 3:2); ḥaggiyâ, sons of Merari (1 Chr 6:30 [MT 15]). These examples attest
the popularity of the name or some version of it.”37

32
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, p. 38). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.
33
Wolff, H. W. (1988). A Continental Commentary: Haggai (p. 16). Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House.
34
See Malachi, Text and Commentary below for discussion of Mal 1:1.
35
See Verhoef, Haggai and Malachi, 4–5, for further discussion and bibliography.
36
H. W. Wolff, Haggai, 37; Verhoef, Haggai and Malachi, 4.
T
MT Masoretic Text
37
Jacobs, M. R. (2017). The Books of Haggai and Malachi. (E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, & R. L. Hubbard Jr., Eds.) (p. 4). Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 13

 Haggai himself and the prophet Ezra simply refer to him as “the prophet
Haggai” (Hag. 1:1; Ezra 5:1; 6:14). However, he is the first prophet to be used by
the God of Israel to address the postexilic Judean community. The contents of
Haggai also identify the specific dates of each of his four messages to this
community, namely 520 B.C. during the second year of the reign of Darius I. Ezra
also asserts that Haggai was joined by the prophet Zechariah (cf. Ezra 5:1-2; 6:14).
The prophet was unique among the prophets of Israel in that his words were
listened and obeyed. The remnant of Israel immediately obeyed what he exhorted
them to do in rebuilding the temple.

Minor Prophets

The book of Haggai is one of the “Minor Prophets,” which are called the Book
of the Twelve in the Hebrew Bible. Haggai is the tenth book in the Masoretic
ordering of the Twelve or Minor Prophets. These twelve books cover a period of
approximately three hundred years, from 760 B.C. to approximately 450 B.C.,
ending with Malachi. Except for the book of Jonah, these books all identify the
author in a heading. They are arranged in the biblical canon chronologically with
the exception of Joel and Obadiah. Hosea, Amos, Jonah and Micah were written in
the eighth century B.C. Nahum, Habakkuk and Zephaniah were penned in the
seventh century B.C. Joel, Obadiah, Haggai and Zechariah were composed in the
sixth century B.C. while Malachi was written in the fifth century B.C. In the
Hebrew Bible, the Minor Prophets were treated as a unity. Though they share
similar themes, each are distinct literary units with distinct messages.
These twelve books are called “minor” not because they are less important in
inspiration and reliability than the “major” prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and
Daniel, but rather mainly because they are short in length in comparison to the
latter books. In fact, as we noted Haggai is the second shortest book in the Old
Testament with Obadiah being the shortest.
The Old Testament was divided into three sections: (1) The Torah (2) The
Prophets (Nabhiim) (3) The Writings (Kethubim). The first section is called the
Torah meaning “the Law” contained: (1) Genesis (2) Exodus (3) Leviticus (4)
Numbers (5) Deuteronomy. The second section was the Prophets which were
divided into two sections: (1) The Former Prophets (2) The Latter Prophets. The
Former Prophets: (1) Joshua (2) Judges (3) Samuel (4) Kings. The Latter Prophets
were divided into two categories: (1) Major (2) Minor. Major Prophets: (1) Isaiah
(2) Jeremiah (3) Ezekiel. The Minor Prophets were also called the Twelve because
they were all contained one book: (1) Hosea (2) Joel (3) Amos (4) Obadiah (5)
Jonah (6) Micah (7) Nahum (8) Habakkuk (9) Zephaniah (10) Haggai (11)
Zechariah (12) Malachi. The third and last section was called the Writings: (1) The

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 14

Poetical Books: Psalms, Proverbs and Job (2) The Five Rolls (Megilloth): Song of
Solomon, Ruth, Ecclesiastes, Esther and Lamentations (3) The Historical Books:
Daniel, Ezra and Nehemiah (1 book) and Chronicles.
Richard Taylor writes “Ancient Judaism regarded the twelve Minor Prophets as
a single unit, referring to these writings collectively as the Book of the Twelve.
This expression has value for calling attention to the unity of the collection,
although some scholars have questioned the suitability of the term ‘book’ in
describing this grouping. Petersen, for example, prefers to speak of this collection
as a thematized anthology rather than a book as such. 38 Nevertheless, the
expression ‘Book of the Twelve’ remains a useful designation so long as some
elasticity is granted to the word. In the MT the statistical note of the Masorah
finalis for the Twelve, which indicates that the total number of verses is 1,050 and
the total number of sections is twenty-one, is found at the end of the entire
collection. This singularity finds expression in ancient counts of the canonical
books that make up the Hebrew Bible, where these twelve books were taken
together and regarded as one.39 As Jerome wrote to Paula and Eustochium, ‘The
twelve prophets are one book.’40 The specific order in which these writings appear
in the Book of the Twelve, however, seems not to have been rigidly determined
until relatively late in the transmission process. At Qumran, for example, we see
evidence of an order that apparently included Jonah at the end of the collection
rather than after Obadiah and before Micah. 41 Other variations in the order of these
books are found in the ancient versions. Septuagint manuscripts, for example,
place Micah and Joel together after Amos rather than following the order found in
the MT that places Joel after Hosea and Micah after Jonah. This is also the order
found in 2 Esdr 1:39–40, apparently through Septuagintal influence. Ben Zvi calls
attention to yet other orders for these books found in extrabiblical sources. 42
Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah 4:22, on the one hand, presents this order:
Amos, Hosea, Micah, Joel, Nahum, Jonah, Obadiah, Habakkuk, Haggai,
Zephaniah, Zechariah, and Malachi. The Lives of the Prophets, on the other hand,
has this order: Hosea, Micah, Amos, Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, Nahum, Habakkuk,
Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. It is clear that the order in which these
writings appear in early canonical listings varies slightly. We should therefore be
38
D. L. Petersen, “A Book of the Twelve?” in Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve, SBLSymS 15 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical
Literature, 2000), 10.
T
MT Masoretic Text
39
For a discussion of a wide range of historical and theological issues regarding the OT canon see R. Beckwith, The Old Testament Canon of the
New Testament Church and Its Background in Early Judaism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1985), and L. M. McDonald and J. A. Sanders, eds., The
Canon Debate (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 2002).
40
Jerome, “Prologus duodecim Prophetarum.” Jerome says, “unum librum esse duodecim Prophetarum.”
41
So 4QXIIa.
T
MT Masoretic Text
42
See E. Ben Zvi, “Twelve Prophetic Books or ‘The Twelve’: A Few Preliminary Considerations,” in Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on
Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts JSOTSup 235 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 134, n. 24.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 15

careful about assuming that our present order of these prophets is necessarily the
one that was adopted when these books were first brought together. In all
likelihood such is not the case. The order of these prophets in our modern versions
probably is based to a large extent on two factors. First, it is influenced by certain
ancient views concerning the relative age of the books, with the allegedly earlier
books preceding the later ones. Second, it is influenced by certain considerations
pertaining to the relative length of the books. The internal evidence for the dates of
these books, however, is not always supportive of such an arrangement. Some
books that seem to date from a later period stand early in the collection. Obadiah
and Joel, for example, are more likely to be dated in the sixth century or later,
rather than in the ninth century as is often advocated, partly on the basis of their
order in this collection. Furthermore, certain short books (e.g., Obadiah) stand
early in the order, while certain long books (e.g., Zechariah) appear late in the
order. In the case of the final three books of this collection, however, there is no
question about the relative dating of the books. Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi are
all late in relationship to the other parts of this collection. Haggai’s placement
toward the end of the Book of the Twelve is reflective, therefore, of the historical
contents of the book. From a purely temporal standpoint Haggai is focused on
events of Jewish history that took place near the conclusion of the period with
which these prophets deal. Zechariah and Malachi deal with even later events.
Haggai’s emphasis on the rebuilding of the Jerusalem temple provides a fitting
biblical transition to the Second Temple period.”43
While the Minor Prophets are twelve distinct books, major themes emerge from
the corpus as a whole and contribute to the larger biblical narrative. The Minor
Prophets assume that Yahweh of Israel is the king of the world and has absolute
authority over the nations of the earth. He uses some nations (such as Assyria and
Babylon) as His instruments of judgment, yet He also holds them accountable for
their mistreatment of His people. He regards the nations as His subjects and
punishes them for violating His standards (Amos 1–2). He displays great concern
for even the most evil nations and will ultimately include all nations within His
earthly kingdom. Yahweh has a covenant, or contract, relationship with His people.
The eighth century prophets accused the people of breaking the Mosaic Law and
remind them of the judgments threatened in the covenant (Deut 28). The postexilic
prophets made it clear that the covenantal relationship was still intact, and that the
returning exiles were responsible to uphold the covenant. While Micah is the only
one of the 12 to refer directly to the Abrahamic promise, other prophets picture the
fulfillment of its blessings (Hos 1:10; Amos 9:15; Mic 7:18–20; Zech 8:13). The
eighth century prophets anticipated a time when Yahweh would reestablish the
Davidic dynasty and restore its former glory (Hos 3:5; Amos 9:12; Mic 5:2).
43
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 45–47). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 16

Zechariah and Haggai attached the Davidic promise to the governor Zerubbabel, a
Davidic descendant (Hag 2:23; Zec 12:8–10) associated with the Branch
prophesied by Jeremiah (compare Jer 23:5; 33:15 with Zech 3:8; 6:12).44
An inspired prophet could be identified using the tests for prophets in
Deuteronomy 13:1-5; 18:14-22. Moses wrote the Pentateuch (Ex. 17:14; 24:4-7;
34:27; Deut. 31:9,22,24; Ezra 7:6; Ps. 103:7; Josh. 8:31, 23:6; I Kings 2:3). Some
prophets clearly state that they were ordered to write (Jer. 30:2; Ezek. 43:11; Is.
8:1) and each of the Twelve Minor Prophets call themselves prophets. The
historical books were written by prophets (I Chron. 29:29; II Chron. 9:29; 12:15;
13:22; 20:34; 32:32; 33:19). Daniel accepted the book of Jeremiah as scripture
(Dan. 9:2) and Joshua received Moses’ writing as Scripture (Josh. 1:26) and Isaiah
and Micah accepted each other's writings as scripture contemporaneously (Is. 2:2-
4; Micah 4:1-4). Solomon, Samuel, Daniel, Isaiah and Ezekiel all had dreams and
visions, which squares with God’s description of a prophet (Deut. 13:1; Num.
12:6-8).
The noun prophetes in the Greek New Testament refers to the Old Testament
prophets of Israel. They were the authorized spokesmen for God and proclaimed
His will, purpose and plan (See Hebrews 1:1-2). The death and resurrection of
Jesus Christ was foretold by the prophets in the Old Testament Scriptures (See 1
Corinthians 15:3-4).
There were a number of activities that the prophets of God were involved in
such as communicating doctrine, issuing judgments, communicating future events,
serving in the Temple, performing miracles, proclaiming Messianic prophecies,
and interceding through prayer for the people (Hab. 3). An inspired prophet could
be identified using the tests for prophets in Deut. 13:1-5; 18:14-22.
The New Testament quotes the Old Testament over six hundred times (all of the
Old Testament books are quoted except Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther, Ecclesiastes, and
Song of Solomon and Acts 2:30 and Matthew 24:15 identify David and Daniel as
prophets). Not only did the apostles learn from the Old Testament Scriptures and
quote them extensively in their writings but also our Lord in His human nature did
as well. After His resurrection from the dead, the Lord Jesus Christ employed the
Old Testament Scriptures to instruct His disciples that the Messiah had to die and
rise again from the dead (See Luke 24:44-47).
The prophets of God who were sent to Israel were in effect covenant enforcers
in the sense that they called the people to repent by confessing their sins to God to
be restored to fellowship with God. They also exhorted them to obedience to God
to maintain that fellowship with God. By rejecting this message, Israel put

44
Barry, J. D., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Mangum, D., & Whitehead, M. M. (2012). Faithlife Study Bible. Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible
Software.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 17

themselves under divine discipline. The fact that God sent the prophets to warn
Israel reveals that God did not want to judge the nation and in fact loved the nation.

Recipients

As we noted, the first and second messages were addressed to Zerubbabel, the
governor of Judah and Joshua the high priest. The third message delivered by
Haggai to the priests of the Law and the fourth and final message was delivered to
Zerubbabel only.
Zerubbabel was the governor of Judah following the Babylonian exile. He is
identified as a descendant of king David (Hag. 1:1) and grandson of King
Jehoiachin and is listed in the genealogies of Jesus found in Matthew and Luke
(Matt. 1:12-13; Luke 3:27). He is named in Ezra 2:2 as one of the leaders of the
Jewish remnant returning from Babylon. Joshua the high priest was taken into exile
by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. He then returned to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel in
approximately 537 B.C. The descendants of his family also returned (Ezra 2:36; cf.
2:40). Together, Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest led the remnant of Judah in
rebuilding the altar and restoring sacrifices in Jerusalem (Ezra 3:2-6). They also
began building the temple but quit when they were faced with strong opposition.
They appealed to King Artaxerxes (Ezra 3:8-4:24). They later corresponded with
King Darius in order to recover Cyrus’ proclamation authorizing the rebuilding of
the temple. This was after Joshua followed the instructions of Zechariah and
Haggai. They finally renewed efforts to rebuild the temple (Ezra 5:2-6:15; Hag.
1:1, 12-14; 2:4). They completed the task in 515 B.C.

Date

The dating of Haggai is relatively easy since the prophet was precise in dating
his prophecies. The first message was delivered by Haggai on the first day of the
sixth month of King Darius’ second year, which was Elul 1 according to the Jewish
calendar, which in our modern Julian calendar was August 29, 520 B.C. (Hag. 1:1-
13). The second message was also delivered to Zerubbabel and Joshua the high
priest during the twenty-first day of the seventh month Darius’ second year (Hag.
2:1-9). This was the Jewish month Tishri, which according to our modern calendar
would be October 17, 520 B.C. The third message delivered by Haggai to the
priests of the Law was on the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month of Darius’
second year, which was the twenty-fourth day of the Jewish month Kislev, which
in our Julian calendar would be December 18, 520 B.C. (Hag. 2:10-19). The fourth
and final message was delivered by Haggai to Zerubbabel only on the twenty-
fourth day of the ninth month of Darius’ second year, which would be the twenty-
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 18
fourth day of the Jewish month Kislev, which is December 18, 520 B.C. in our
modern calendar (Hag. 2:20-23).
Pamela Scalise commenting on the date of Haggai writes “Haggai’s messages
were given in the sixth, seventh, and ninth months of the second year of Darius—
late summer through late autumn of 520 BC. These dates were significant for
politics, agriculture and worship. 1. The Persian Empire used the Babylonian
calendar—the new year began in the spring. Darius claimed the throne in October
of 522 BC. Assuming that Darius counted his first year beginning in April 521, by
the date of Haggai’s first message (the first day of the sixth month in Darius’
second year [520]) Darius had put down most of the rebellions that had
accompanied his claiming the throne. Scattered resistance continued until 519 BC.
(Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, 117). If, however, Darius counted the months
following October 522 BC as his first year, then the dates of Haggai would be in
521 BC. Darius filled his years on the throne with major accomplishments. For
example, he organized the empire into satrapies, built palaces in Susa and
Persepolis, and constructed a canal connecting the Nile River to the Red Sea
(Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, 137, 140, 165). 2. The dates in Haggai are
agriculturally significant. The rainy season in the land of Israel usually extends
from October to April. Barley and wheat were harvested in the spring. By the end
of summer, in the sixth month (Hag 1:1, 15), farmers were calculating how much
grain they could afford to plant so that their families could have bread to eat until
the next harvest. Fruits were the main crops picked at the end of the summer dry
season. The 21st day of the seventh month (Hag 2:1) was the seventh day of the
Feast of Tabernacles, celebrating the autumn harvest. The grapes, pomegranates
and olives were being counted, and the poverty of the harvest would have been
known. Two months later, by the 24th day of the ninth month (Hag 2:10), the rains
should have been falling regularly on fields, vineyards and orchards. The questions
on that day (Hag 2:19) were about current conditions, ‘Is there any seed left in the
barn? Do the vine, the fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree still yield
nothing?’ That day was the turning point from meager harvests to prosperity
because the Jews had begun to work on the temple. God promised, ‘From this day
on I will bless you’(Hag 2:18–19). 3. Haggai’s first and second messages were
delivered on liturgically significant days. The first day of the month (Hag 1:1) was
a day of rejoicing and trumpet playing (Num 10:10; 28:11; Psa 81:4 [NRSV 3]).
Joshua, Zerubbabel, and the people may have gathered around the altar in the
temple courtyard. At the Feast of Tabernacles (Hag 2:1), the community celebrated
the ingathering of the most costly crops—the grapes and olives that were used to
pay taxes and engage in trade. They also commemorated God’s care for their
ancestors in the Sinai wilderness, remembering that God had fed them with manna
—bread from heaven—and water from the rock, and that their shoes and clothing
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 19
did not wear out (Neh 9:19–21). In spite of this, Israel had complained and rebelled
against God in the wilderness. The Psalms often mention the people’s bad behavior
there (e.g., Pss 78:17–42; 106:13–33). This festival may have been an occasion for
exhortation, as in Psa 95:8–9, ‘Do not harden your hearts, as at Meribah, as on the
day at Massah in the wilderness when your ancestors tested me …’ (NRSV).
Although Haggai does not name the feast, the original hearers and readers of the
book would have recognized the date and the things it commemorated. The
conditions described in Haggai 1:6 are the opposite of the wilderness experience;
they lived in houses, but their harvests were poor, their hunger and thirst weren’t
satisfied, their clothing was inadequate, and their pockets had holes. The first
temple had been dedicated at the Feast of Tabernacles (1 Kgs 8:1–66). According
to Ezra 3:4, the Feast of Tabernacles was celebrated after the altar was restored in
538 BC. To Haggai’s hearers the temple site looked like ‘nothing’ at the end of the
festival in 520 BC (Hag 2:3). A reminder of their ancestors’ wilderness experience
gave them encouragement—'for I am with you, says the Lord of hosts, according to
the promise that I made you when you came out of Egypt’ (Hag 2:4–5, NRSV).
The observance is not mentioned again until Neh 8. After hearing the book of the
law read aloud in the seventh month (Deut 31:9–13), the people celebrated
Tabernacles in accordance with the requirements of the law. They wept but were
encouraged to rejoice instead, following the commandment in Deut 16:14, ‘Be
joyful at your festival’ (TNIV).”45

Historical Background

In 605 B.C., Nebuchadnezzar attacked Egypt in the Battle of Carchemish which

resulted in the defeat of Egypt. Carchemish was destroyed by the Babylonians in
approximately June of that year. The Babylonian king pursued the Egyptians and
thus expanded his area of authority. He went into Syria and toward Palestine. Upon
learning of the death of his father Nabopolassar, Nebuchadnezzar returned from
Riblah to Babylon in August 605 B.C. where he was crowned king. After this he
returned to Palestine and attacked Jerusalem in September 605 B.C. This conquest
of Jerusalem resulted in Daniel and his companions being taken back to Babylon as
captives.
Nebuchadnezzar returned to Judah again a second time in 597 B.C. where he
laid siege to Jerusalem in response to Jehoiachim’s ill-advised rebellion. At this
point, Jerusalem was now subjugated to Babylon. Ten thousand captives were
taken to Babylon, one of whom was the prophet Ezekiel (Ezekiel 1:1-3; 2 Kings
23:8-20; 2 Chronicles 36:6-10).
45
Scalise, P. J. (2016). Haggai, Book of. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W.
Widder (Eds.), The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 20

 Jehoiakim died that year and was succeeded by his son Jehoiachin who was also
known as Jeconiah or Coniah. He surrendered to the Babylonians after only three
months in power. He was taken as a prisoner to Babylon along with the royal
family, the court, the upper classes and the artisans. The Temple was looted, and
its articles taken as booty to Babylon.
After the attack in 597 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar established Zedekiah (Mattaniah)
who was the uncle of Jehoiachin, as a puppet ruler in Judah. He was urged to rebel
and ally with Egypt against the protestations of Jeremiah (Jeremiah 37:6ff.;
38:14ff.). Zedekiah did not pay heed to Jeremiah and allied himself with Egypt and
revolted against Nebuchadnezzar. The Chaldean armies invaded Judah in 587 B.C.
He attacked Jerusalem after destroying the small Syrian states and laying siege to
Lachish and Azekah as predicted by Jeremiah (Jeremiah 25:9).
Jeremiah repeatedly predicted the destruction of the city of David by the
Chaldeans and urged Zedekiah to capitulate, but his counsel was rejected. The
prophet was accused of being a traitor and was thrown into prison. Zedekiah
spared his life, but he remained imprisoned throughout the siege.
In 586 B.C. Nebuchadnezzar returned a third time where he again laid siege to
the city of David, breaching the walls and destroying the city and burned the
temple of Solomon in 586 B.C. The majority of Jews who were not killed in this
offensive were also taken captive to Babylon (2 Kings 25;1-7; Jeremiah 34:1-7;
39:1-7; 52:2-11). Nebuchadnezzar’s third and final campaign against the southern
kingdom of Judah and its capital city Jerusalem resulted in the destruction of and
deportation of the majority of the population to Babylon.
However, upon Nabopolassar’s ascension to power as king of the Neo-
Babylonian empire, the balance of power in the eastern world was shifting as
Cyaxares (625-585) became the ruler over Media and all northern Mesopotamia.
He conquered Persia and installed Cambyses as its governor. Cyaxares died and his
son, Astyages (585-550) ascended the throne.
This king’s daughter was the mother of Cyrus II and vassal of her father and
ruler of the Persian province of Anshan. Cyrus made an alliance with Nabonidus,
the king of Babylonia and Astyages’s enemy. Consequently, there was a major rift
in the relationship between Astyages and Cyrus. Soon after Media was conquered
by Cyrus in 550 B.C.
As these events were taking place in Persia, Amel-Marduk (562-560),
Neriglissar (560-556), Labashi-Marduk (556), and Nabonidus (556-539) followed
the magnificent career of Nebuchadnezzar II who had invaded the southern
kingdom of Judah three times in 605, 597 and 586 B.C. Nabonidus was
preoccupied with his cult and foreign travel and trade and thus left the
responsibility of governing to Belshazzar. This was a disaster as recorded in Daniel
chapter 5 since the Medo-Persian empire led by Cyrus overthrew the city of
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 21
Babylon, which was thought to be impregnable and absorbed the Babylonian
empire.
In 538 B.C., Cyrus, the king of Persia conquered Babylon. The fall of Babylon
is also described in ancient secular literature such as in the writings of Herodotus,
Xenophon and the Nabonidus Chronicle. These sources make clear that the
Persians captured the city of Babylon without a major battle. Herodotus states that
Cyrus took Babylon by temporarily diverting the course of the Euphrates during a
nocturnal festival (1.190-191).
Xenophon says that the Persians killed Belshazzar who he describes as a
riotous, indulgent, cruel and godless man (Cyrus 4-7 on the fall of Babylon).
Berossus tells us that when Nabonidus knew Cyrus was going to attack him, he
engaged the Persian’s forces. However, he was defeated and with a few of his
troops was shut up in the city of Borsippus. After this Cyrus took Babylon and
gave the order to destroy the city’s outer walls since they caused him so much
trouble.
Herodotus writes “[190] [1] Then at the beginning of the following spring,
when Cyrus had punished the Gyndes by dividing it among the three hundred and
sixty canals, he marched against Babylon at last. The Babylonians sallied out and
awaited him; and when he came near their city in his march, they engaged him, but
they were beaten and driven inside the city. [2] There they had stored provisions
enough for very many years, because they knew already that Cyrus was not a man
of no ambitition and saw that he attacked all nations alike; so now they were
indifferent to the siege; and Cyrus did not know what to do, being so long delayed
and gaining no advantage. [191] [1] Whether someone advised him in his
difficulty, or whether he perceived for himself what to do, I do not know, but he
did the following. [2] He posted his army at the place where the river goes into the
city, and another part of it behind the city, where the river comes out of the city,
and told his men to enter the city by the channel of the Euphrates when they saw it
to be fordable. Having disposed them and given this command, he himself
marched away with those of his army who could not fight; [3] and when he came
to the lake, Cyrus dealt with it and with the river just as had the Babylonian queen:
drawing off the river by a canal into the lake, which was a marsh, he made the
stream sink until its former channel could be forded. [4] When this happened, the
Persians who were posted with this objective made their way into Babylon by the
channel of the Euphrates, which had now sunk to a depth of about the middle of a
man's thigh. [5] Now if the Babylonians had known beforehand or learned what
Cyrus was up to, they would have let the Persians enter the city and have destroyed
them utterly; for then they would have shut all the gates that opened on the river
and mounted the walls that ran along the river banks, and so caught their enemies
in a trap. [6] But as it was, the Persians took them unawares, and because of the
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 22
great size of the city (those who dwell there say) those in the outer parts of it were
overcome, but the inhabitants of the middle part knew nothing of it; all this time
they were dancing and celebrating a holiday which happened to fall then, until they
learned the truth only too well. [192] [1] And Babylon, then for the first time, was
taken in this way.”46
Daniel chapter five records that Belshazzar and his guests praised gods
composed of gold, silver, bronze, iron, wood and stone. Undoubtedly, they were
praising these gods because they erroneously believed that they had protected the
city of Babylon for hundred of years and would do so again since Babylon had not
fallen to an invading army in a thousand years at the time when the king threw this
party for his nobles. Belshazzar and his nobles were not only showing contempt for
the Medes and Persians but also God. They had great confidence in the city’s
fortifications since the city had not fallen to an invader for a thousand years.
However, ingeniously, Cyrus’ commander Ugbaru who is referred to in the
Chronicle as governor of Gutium, diverted the waters of the Euphrates to an old
channel dug by a previous ruler which suddenly reduced the water level well below
the river-gates. Not too long after that the Persian invaders came wading in at night
and clambered up the riverbank before the guards of the city knew what happened.
Pentecost writes “The city had been under assault by Cyrus. In anticipation of a
long siege the city had stored supplies to last for 20 years. The Euphrates River ran
through the city from north to south, so the residents had an ample water supply.
Belshazzar had a false sense of security, because the Persian army, led by Ugbaru,
was outside Babylon’s city walls. Their army was divided; part was stationed
where the river entered the city at the north and the other part was positioned
where the river exited from the city at the south. The army diverted the water north
of the city by digging a canal from the river to a nearby lake. With the water
diverted, its level receded, and the soldiers were able to enter the city by going
under the sluice gate. Since the walls were unguarded the Persians, once inside the
city, were able to conquer it without a fight. Significantly the defeat of Babylon
fulfilled not only the prophecy Daniel made earlier that same night (5:28) but also
a prophecy by Isaiah (Isa. 47:1-5). The overthrow of Babylon took place the night
of the 16th of Tishri (October 12, 539 B.C.). The rule of the Medes and Persians
was the second phase of the times of the Gentiles (the silver chest and arms of the
image in Dan. 2). The events in chapter 5 illustrate that God is sovereign and
moves according to His predetermined plans. Those events also anticipate the final
overthrow of all Gentile world powers that rebel against God and are characterized
by moral and spiritual corruption. Such a judgment, anticipated in Psalm 2:4-6 and

46
Herodotus. (1920). Herodotus, with an English translation by A. D. Godley (A. D. Godley, Ed.). Medford, MA: Harvard University Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 23

Revelation 19:15-16, will be fulfilled at the Second Advent of Jesus Christ to this
earth.”47
Immediately after the capture of Babylon, Cyrus ordered all the statues of
Nabonidus had brought to the capital to be restored to their native cities. He
followed this by issuing a decree freeing all the captives of Babylon. Thus, the
Jewish exiles in Babylon were permitted to return to their homeland and restore
Jerusalem and rebuild the temple (cf. Ezra 1:2-4; 6:3-5).

Babylonian Conquest and Campaigns Against Jerusalem and Judah

47
Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1985). The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Da
5:29–31). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 24

The Exiles Jews in Babylon Return to Jerusalem

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 25

 Mark Boda writes “Cyrus did not rule for long over his expansive realm. He
was killed in 530 B.C. on a military expedition on the eastern frontier of the empire
and with his death rule was transferred to his son Cambyses. The transition was
relatively smooth and enabled Cambyses to carry out his father’s dream to invade
Egypt, incorporating it into the empire in 525. While in Egypt, however,
Cambyses’ hold on the home front was challenged when in March 522, one of the
Magi in the court (Bardiya/Gaumata) rebelled and claimed he was Smerdis, the
brother Cambyses had quietly killed before embarking for Egypt. Enticed by a
promise of relaxed tax policies, the core of the empire supported this rebellion,
forcing Cambyses to return to Mesopotamia. Unfortunately, he would never reach
his destination, accidentally wounding himself with his knife en route. One of
Cambyses’ generals who was related to the royal family, Darius, assumed control
of the Persian army. He returned to Media and, along with “the Seven”
(representatives from the seven leading Persian families), conspired against
Bardiya/Gaumata and killed him in September 522 B.C.48 This action set off further
rebellions across the empire that consumed much of Darius’s energies in the first
few years as he consolidated his power. Rebellions in two areas of the empire are
relevant to the study of Haggai and Zechariah. Babylon rebelled immediately
under Nidintu-Bel (Nebuchadnezzar III), but this was crushed in December 522
B.C. by Darius himself, who subsequently remained in Babylon until June 521 in
order to establish his control. Egypt revolted in 519, prompting Darius’s military
expedition in 519–518 B.C., which returned Egypt to his dominion. After this
Darius moved eastward and took the Indus valley, placing the three major river
48
T. C. Young, “The Consolidation of the Empire and Its Limits of Growth under Darius and Xerxes,” in CAH, 4:54; A. Kuhrt, “Babylonia from
Cyrus to Xerxes,” in CAH, 4:129.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 26

valleys of the ancient Near East (Nile, Tigris-Euphrates, Indus) under one ruler for
the first time in history. During this period Jews continued to return to Palestine,
and in the early years of Darius built an altar, reintroduced sacrificial rites, restored
the foundation of the temple, and completed the structure by 515 B.C. (Ezra 2–6).
This was accomplished through the benevolent intervention of Darius amidst
hostility from others in Palestine (Ezra 5–6).”49
Under the leadership of Sheshbazzar, 50,000 Jewish exiles returned from
Babylon to begin work on restoring Jerusalem and rebuilding the temple.
Approximately two years later in 536 B.C., they completed the foundation with
much rejoicing (Ezra 3:8-10). However, their success disturbed the Samaritans and
their other neighbors who lived in fear of the political and religious implications of
a rebuilt temple in a restored Jewish state. Consequently, they stridently opposed
the project and were successful in temporarily stopping the restoration. But in 522
B.C. Darius Hystaspes (522-486 B.C.) became king of Persia (Ezra 4:1-5, 24).
During this monarch’s second year, both Zechariah and Haggai exhorted the
Jewish remnant to rebuild the temple. Tattenai, the governor of Trans-Euphrates,
Shethar-Bozenai and their colleagues attempted to interfere with the rebuilding
efforts. However, Darius Hystaspes ruled in favor of the Jews after investigating
the matter in the royal records (cf. Ezra 5:3-6; 6:6-12). In 516 B.C., the temple was
finished and dedicated (Ezra 6:15-18).
Haggai’s first message was delivered on the first day of the sixth month of King
Darius’ second year, which was Elul 1 according to the Jewish calendar, which in
our modern Julian calendar was August 29, 520 B.C. (Hag. 1:1-13). It was
addressed to Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah and Joshua the high priest. The
second message was also delivered to Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest during
the twenty-first day of the seventh month Darius’ second year (Hag. 2:1-9). This
was the Jewish month Tishri, which according to our modern calendar would be
October 17, 520 B.C. The third message delivered by Haggai to the priests of the
Law was on the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month of Darius’ second year,
which was the twenty-fourth day of the Jewish month Kislev, which in our Julian
calendar would be December 18, 520 B.C. (Hag. 2:10-19). Lastly, the fourth and
final message was delivered by Haggai to Zerubbabel only on the twenty-fourth
day of the ninth month of Darius’ second year, which would be the twenty-fourth
day of the Jewish month Kislev, which is December 18, 520 B.C. in our modern
calendar (Hag. 2:20-23).
Eugene Merrill writes “In 538 B.C. Cyrus issued his decree that the Jews and
all other captive peoples could return to their respective homelands. He had begun
to organize his vast domain into a system of satrapies further subdivided into

49
Boda, M. J. (2004). Haggai, Zechariah (pp. 26–27). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 27

provinces,50 and the satrapy of special relevance to the Jewish community was
known as Babili eber nari (“Babylon beyond the river”), a huge jurisdiction
between the Euphrates River and the Mediterranean Sea.51 Within that satrapy were
entities such as Galilee, Samaria, Ashdod, Ammon, and especially Yehud (or
Judah).52 Each of these was under a governor who reported directly to the satrap, or
administrator of the district of eber nari.
The picture is not entirely clear, but it seems that Yehud, though weak and
impoverished compared to its provincial neighbors such as Samaria, was
independent of them and not a subdivision. Thus, the various Jewish governors
could carry their case directly to the satrap in times of difficulty. The first of these
governors was Sheshbazzar, leader of the first return from Babylon to Jerusalem
(Ezra 1:5-11; 5:14). It is likely that he is the same as Shenazzar, a son of
Jehoiachin, the last surviving king of Judah (1 Chron. 3:18).53 He held his position
evidently for only a brief time, for already in the second year after Cyrus’s decree
(536 B.C.) Zerubbabel appears as the governor (Ezra 3:2, 8; cf. Hag. 1:1).
The relationship of Zerubbabel to Sheshbazzar and to the Davidic dynasty is
somewhat obscure.54 He is usually described as the ‘son of Shealtiel’ (Ezra 3:2, 8;
Neh. 12:1; Hag. 1:1, 12, 14; 2:2, 23; Matt. 1:12), but in the Chronicler’s genealogy
he is the son of Pedaiah (1 Chron. 3:19). Both Shealtiel and Pedaiah were sons of
Jehoiachin—along with Shenazzar (= Sheshbazzar?)—so either Zerubbabel was
the levirate son of Pedaiah on behalf of Shealtiel 55 or (more likely) Shealtiel had
died before he could become governor, his younger brother Sheshbazzar taking
that role instead.56 Zerubbabel, son of Shealtiel and nephew of Sheshbazzar, then
succeed Sheshbazzar upon his death. Pedaiah possibly served as foster father for
Zerubbabel until he reached his maturity.
Sara Japhet argues that Sheshbazzar was the first governor of Judah but denies
that he was related to Zerubbabel or, indeed, to the royal family at all. 57 F. C.
Fensham says that it is not acceptable to identify Sheshbazzar with the Shenazzar
of 1 Chron. 3:18 and that his identification as ‘prince’ (ayc]N`j^ hannas) in Ezra
1:8 proves nothing more than that he was a person raised to a position of
authority.58 This is the view also of Joseph Blenkinsopp who admits that
50
Gray and Cary, “The Reign of Darius,” CAH 4:194-201.
51
Anson Rainey, “The Satrapy ‘Beyond the River,’“ AJBA 1/2 (1969): 51-78; Ephraim Stern, “The Persian Empire and the Political and Social
History of Palestine in the Persian Period,” in The Cambridge History of Judaism, vol. 1, Introduction: The Persian Period, eds. W. D. Davies and
Louis Finkelstein (Cambridge: Cambridge Univ., 1984), 78-87.
52
The province is called yehuda in Haggai but yehud in the Aramaic of Ezra 7:14 and in extrabiblical bullae and seals. See Carol L. Meyers and
Eric M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, AB (Garden City: N.Y.: Doubleday, 1987), 13-14.
53
Thus John Bright, A History of Israel, 3rd ed. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1981), 362. For a presentation of various views see Sara Japhet,
“Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel Against the Background of the Historical and Religious Tendencies of Ezra-Nehemiah,” ZAW 94 (1982): 71-72.
54
For various views see Roddy Braun, 1 Chronicles, WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1986), 52-53.
55
Wilhelm Rudolph, Haggai-Sacharja 1-8—Sacharja 9-14—Maleachi, KAT (Gütersloh: Gütersolher: Verlaghaus Gerd Mohn, 1976), 31.
56
Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1-8, 11.
57
Japhet, “Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel,” 94-98.
58
F. C. Fensham, The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah. NICOT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1982), 46.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 28

Sheshbazzar’s title would be unassailable evidence of his Davidic lineage were it
possible to connect Sheshbazzar with Shenazzar. With most modern scholars he
concludes that nothing can be known of Sheshbazzar’s identity.59
What is important is that Zerubbabel was a grandson of Jehoiachin and
therefore the legitimate heir of the Davidic throne. His appointment as governor
allowed his Judean royal descent to coincide with his Persian political
appointment. How long he served in that capacity cannot be determined, but he
was still governor by 520 B.C. The recent discovery of bullae and seals bearing the
names of Judean governors suggests that Zerubbabel may be dated to c. 510,
Elnathan c. 510-490, Yeho ‘ezer c. 490-470, and Ahzai c. 447-445.60 Nehemiah, of
course, commenced his governorship then and continued on to 433 B.C.
Little is known of the period between the decree of Cyrus (538 B.C.) and the
ministry of Haggai and Zechariah (520 B.C.). Evidently Cyrus had laid down a
firm political and social foundation, and until his death in 530 B.C. the Persian
empire, including Yehud, enjoyed tranquillity and prosperity. Ezra provides the
information that in the seventh month of the first year back (537 B.C.) the people,
under the leadership of Zerubbabel and Joshua the priest, built an altar on the
temple ruins and celebrated the Feast of Tabernacles (Ezra 3:1-7). In the second
month of the next year (536) the foundations of the new temple were laid (Ezra
3:8-10). After this the record is virtually silent except for the statement that the
adversaries of the Jews began a campaign of harassment, seeking to prevent
reconstruction of the house of the Lord. This continued throughout the reign of
Cyrus and Cambyses (530-522) into that time of Darius (522-486).
Cambyses, son of Cyrus, was noted particularly for his conquest of Egypt and
its absorption into the Persian hegemony. Cambyses also left a negative legacy of
mismanagement that left the Empire in a near shambles. His mysterious death was
followed by an attempted usurpation of the Persian throne by Gaumata, an official
who claimed to be a brother of Cambyses hitherto thought to be dead. Before
Gaumata could seize control, he was assassinated by Darius Hystaspes and some
collaborators, and Darius placed himself in power on September 29, 522.61
The chaotic reign of Cambyses without doubt contributed to the ability of the
Jews’ enemies to interdict their work and otherwise make life miserable for them.
The succession of Darius changed all that, however, for after he put down various
rebellions attendant to his rise to power, he implemented far-ranging and effective
political and fiscal policies that brought stability throughout his realm. Within two
years all was at peace, except for Egypt. Darius therefore made plans to invade that
59
Joseph Blenkinsopp, Ezra-Nehemiah. (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1988), 78-79.
60
These approximate dates follow the suggestions of N. Avigad, Bullae and Seals from a Post-Exilic Judean Archive. Qedem (Jerusalem: The
Hebrew Univ., 1976), 4:35.
61
There is a lacuna in the calendars at the time of Darius’s accession, but A. Poebel and W. Hinz make a case for this date. Cf. Ackroyd, “Two
Old Testament Historical Problems,” 14 n. 9.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 29

intractable satrapy and bring it into line, an action that took place in 519-518
B.C. 62
Meanwhile, Judah’s foes, including even Tattenai, governor of the entire eber
nari province, hoped to capitalize on Darius’s newness to office by sending a letter
warning him about Jewish rebellion (Ezra 5:6-17). Darius immediately made a
search of the archives of Cyrus at Ecbatana and verified that the Jewish claims that
reconstruction of the temple and city was authorized by Cyrus himself were true.
Without further ado the work was resumed and completed by 515 B.C. (6:15). The
anticipated march of Darius through Palestine on his way to Egypt in 519 may
have done as much as anything to encourage the Jews and frustrate the evil
intentions of their neighbors.
This, then, is the setting of the ministries of Haggai and Zechariah. First
appearing in the biblical record in 520 B.C., two years after Darius’s accession,
they took advantage of the Pax Persiaca to urge their compatriots on to the noble
task of Temple building (Hag. 1:2; cf. Ezra 5:1-2). Joyce Baldwin is correct in
asserting (contrary to many scholars) that Haggai’s exhortation to build was not a
sign of rebellion against a Persian government in disarray, for he was already many
months too late for that; rather, he was taking advantage of the peace that
ensued after Darius was established.63 From a political standpoint the prospects
were never more bright and, said the prophets, never were times more propitious to
reestablish the theocratic community so that Yahweh’s ancient covenant promises
to His people could find fulfillment.
The biblical texts, though scanty, make it quite clear that the restoration
community was small and demoralized. Ezra reckons the number of returnees
under Sheshbazzar (or Zerubbabel) to have been 42,360 in addition to 7,337 slaves
and 200 singers (Ezra 2:64-65). The number of indigenous Jews is unknown but
could not have numbered more than that. John Bright argues that the total
population of Judah in 522 B.C. could not have exceeded 20,000, but his estimate
is based on a denial that the list of returnees in Ezra 2 and Nehemiah 7 refers to the
return under Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel, a denial that is without
foundation.64 That it is an account of early return (between 538 and 522) is put
beyond dispute by H. G. M. Williamson. 65 Some rebuilding must have been
undertaken in the Judean towns and villages since their destruction at Babylonian
hands, but Jerusalem remained mostly in ruins (Ezra 5:3, 9).
The repopulation of the land, at least outside Jerusalem, gave rise to the
rebuilding of houses and storage buildings and to the clearing and cultivation of the

62
Olmstead, History of the Persian Empire, 141.
63
Joyce G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi (London: Tyndale, 1972), 16.
64
Bright, A History of Israel, 365.
65
H. G. M Williamson, Ezra, Nehemiah. WBC (Waco, Tex.: Word, 1985), 30-32.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 30

farmlands. In fact, it was the rapidity and conviction with which this was done that
caused Haggai to lament that, by comparison, the house of the Lord was neglected.
His burden then was that this inequity be redressed and that the people do all they
could in spite of their still rather limited resources to erect a house of the Lord that
could provide a suitable expression of His presence among them. Until this was
done the restoration would remain incomplete and the gracious promises of the
Lord unfulfilled.”66
Now, when investigating the historical background of the book of Haggai, one
must not confuse Darius the Mede with Darius I who began to rule in 522 B.C.
since the latter was a about twenty-eight by 522 B.C. having been born in
approximately 550 B.C. whereas the former was sixty-two when he began to rule
according to Daniel 5:31 (6:1). Furthermore, Darius I was of a Persian royal line
because his father, Hystaspes, was of the Achaemenid dynasty whereas the father
Darius the Mede was Ahasuerus who was of Median descent according to Daniel
9:1. Darius I took the throne by a coup d’état whereas Cyrus appointed Darius the
Mede to be king over Babylon according to Daniel 9:1.
Darius I is mentioned in Ezra 4:5, 24; 5:5-7; 6:1, 12, 15 as well as Haggai 1:1;
2:10; Zechariah 1:1, 7; 7:1 whereas Darius the Mede is only mentioned in the book
of Daniel (6:1, 6, 9, 25, 28; 9:1; 11:1). The royal houses of the kingdoms of Media
and Persia were closely related by marriage, which the Median king, Astyages, had
arranged. He wed his daughter, Mandane to Cambyses, King of Anshan. This
union produced Cyrus the Great who later became king of Persia. Astyages had a
son as well, namely Darius Cyaxares (pronounced sigh AKS uh reez) II who is none
other than Darius the Mede and uncle of Cyrus the Great. The latter spent little
time in Babylon after its capture. Thus, he left Babylon in Darius’ hands, his uncle.
Cyrus eventually married the daughter of Darius. Then approximately two years
later, upon the death of Darius, Cyrus united the kingdoms of Media and Persia
and assumed the title King of Persia.
Nehemiah 12:22 mentions a Darius the Persian, who is not the same Darius
mentioned in Daniel chapter six since the latter of course was a Mede according to
Daniel 6:1. This Darius was known as Darius Codomannus or Darius III. He was
the last king of Persia. His empire was destroyed by Alexander the Great.
The Medo-Persian Empire was represented by the silver arms and chest of the
statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream recorded in Daniel chapter 2. This kingdom
lasted over 200 years (539-330 B.C.), longer than the Neo-Babylonian Empire of 87
years (626-539). However, as we noted in Daniel chapter two this empire was
inferior in quality to the Babylonian empire just as silver compared with gold.
Darius the Mede is the same as Gubaru, who was the governor appointed over
Babylon by Cyrus. This interpretation is strongly supported by the biblical text
66
Merrill, Eugene H., An Exegetical Commentary: Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; www.bible.org.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 31

because Daniel 5:31 (6:1) and Daniel 9:1 make clear that Darius the Mede was
appointed king over Babylon.

Map of the Persian Empire

Zerubbabel’s Temple

The book of Haggai is focused upon the rebuilding of the temple since in 586
B.C. Solomon’s temple was destroyed by the army of Nebuchadnezzar. The
construction of the second temple started in 586 B.C. under the leadership of
Zerubbabel, thus it is called “Zerubbabel’s temple” by scholars and expositors of
the bible. When the construction was completed in 516 B.C. during the sixth year
of the reign of Darius I (522-486) under urging of Zechariah and Haggai, the
remnant who remembered Solomon’s temple wept (cf. Ezra 3:12).
Ezra 3-6 provides details regarding the rebuilding of the temple by returning
exiles. This account asserts that the rebuilding began promptly in 536 B.C. but
after the altar was built (Ezra 3:1-7) and the foundation was completed (Ezra 3:8-
13), the project came to a halt because of resistance from the people of the land

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 32

(Ezra 4:1-5). Those opposing convinced the king of Persia to withdraw support
from the project (Ezra 4:19-23). Fifteen years would pass (535-520 B.C.) before
the work would begin again during the second year of the reign of Darius (Ezra
4:24). The prophets Zechariah and Haggai helped Zerubbabel restart the project
and work began again in 520 B.C. (Ezra 5:1; Hag. 1:1; Zech. 1:1). The temple
construction was completed during the sixth year of the reign of Darius in 515 B.C.
(Ezra 6:15). The temple was dedicated by the Jewish remnant with a tremendous
outpouring of joy and thanksgiving (Ezra 6:16-18).
The dimensions of Zerubbabel’s temple more than likely constructed on the
same foundation as Solomon’s temple and thus had the same east-west orientation.
Solomon’s temple measured 60 cubits in length, 20 in width, and 30 in height. Ezra
6:3 does not specify the length but does assert that it was 60 cubits wide and 60
cubits high. This discrepancy is probably because the new temple was the same
size as Solomon’s. One should compare 2 Chronicles 3:3 for the dimensions of
Solomon’s temple.
Although the new temple was relatively simple in comparison to the
ostentatiousness of Solomon’s temple, Haggai prophesied that the former would be
greater than the latter (Hag. 2:3-9). In fact, this was fulfilled in history since Jesus
Christ who was a descendant of Zerubbabel (Luke 3:27; Matt. 1:12) entered into
Zerubbabel’s temple and taught and performed miracles in it (Matt. 21:12-27;
Mark 11:15-33; Luke 2:22, 46; 19:45-20:8).
The worship of Yahweh in Zerubbabel’s temple by the Jews went uninterrupted
until the rule of the Seleucid Antiochus Epiphanes IV in 169 B.C. 1 Maccabees
1:20-28 records him entering the temple and removing the vessels used in the
sanctuary. Jerome asserts that he set up an image of Jupiter Olympus on the temple
grounds. Josephus records that he built a “pagan altar” on the original altar and
sacrificed a pig on it (Antiquities 12.5-4-253). This abomination came to an end as
a result of the Maccabean revolt which was led by the Hasmoneans (165-164
B.C.). In 63 B.C., the Roman general Pompey attacked Jerusalem and entered the
temple and thus desecrating it. Herod the Great renovated the temple beginning in
the 18th year of his reign around 20 B.C. However, in fulfillment of Jesus’
prophecy it was eventually destroyed by the Romans in 70 A.D.
Richard Tyler writes “It would be difficult to overestimate the importance of
the Jerusalem temple to Old Testament literature and history of the first
millennium B.C.67 The temple plays a prominent theological role in much of the
Old Testament in general and certainly in the Book of Haggai in particular. The
single most important theological theme in the Book of Haggai concerns the

67
It is therefore not surprising that the Jerusalem temple has so captured the attention of people over the centuries. As Meyers points out, “No
other building of the ancient world, either while it stood in Jerusalem or in the millennia since its final destruction, has been the focus of so much
attention throughout the ages” (“Temple, Jerusalem,” ABD 6 [1992]: 350).

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 33

centrality of the Jerusalem temple to the religious life of Jews of the post-exilic
period.68 This fierce prophet of the restoration was single-minded in his
commitment to bring to rapid completion the task of rebuilding the house of the
Lord. For Haggai the temple derived its great importance from the fact that it was
nothing less than ‘the LORD’s house’ (bêt YHWH, 1:2) or ‘the LORD’s temple’
(hêkal YHWH, 2:15, 18). Even more emphatically, the temple could be called ‘the
house of the LORD Almighty’ (bêt YHWH ṣĕbāʾôt, 1:14); that is to say, it was the
one building that was particularly associated with the presence of the sovereign
Lord. Because it was such, the Lord himself did not shrink back from calling the
temple ‘my house’ (bêtî, 1:9). It was in the rebuilding of this structure that the Lord
‘takes pleasure,’ and it is the one place where he would be uniquely ‘honored’
(1:8). The Lord promised in the future to fill the temple with his glory in such a
way that its splendor would surpass even that of the justly famous Solomonic
temple (2:7, 9; cf. 2:3). For Haggai the temple held tremendous theological
significance as a structure with which the Lord had chosen to associate himself in a
most unique way. A corollary to this belief was the conclusion that the temple
should be afforded appropriate respect and commitment on the part of the
followers of the Lord. Due to its central importance for the religious life of the
Jewish people in Old Testament times, it is not too much to say that for centuries
the temple actually helped define what it meant to be Jewish.69
Criticism of Haggai’s restricted theological focus perhaps fails to grasp the
theological importance of the temple to normative Jewish life in Old Testament
times.70 Without the temple it was impossible to fulfill certain basic aspects of
Jewish religious life, such as various requirements of sacrifice and corporate
worship. Furthermore, the temple was the special place where the Lord resided (1
Kgs 8:12; Ezek 43:7); it was his unique “resting place” (Ps 132:14). This is not to
say that faithful Jews in the Old Testament period had a notion that somehow God
could be entirely and exclusively contained in the temple. This was clearly not the
case. Even Solomon, who initiated the building of the first temple, reasoned as
follows:
But will God really dwell on earth with men? The heavens, even the highest
heavens, cannot contain you. How much less this temple I have built! (1 Kgs
8:27; cf. Isa 66:1)

68
In the Hb. Bible there is considerable theological significance attached not only to the temple but to the city of Jerusalem as well. On the
theological significance of the city of Jerusalem in the Hb. Scriptures, see S. Talmon, “The Biblical Concept of Jerusalem,” JES 8 (1971): 300–
316.
69
For a discussion of how Jewish ethnicity was defined during the Persian period, see M. W. Hamilton, “Who Was a Jew? Jewish Ethnicity
during the Achaemenid Period,” ResQ 37 (1995): 102–17.
70
As May points out, “When one appreciates the positive contribution of the temple to the religion of Israel in the pre-exilic period and what it
meant in the development of post-exilic Judaism, Haggai’s role is seen in better perspective” (“ ‘This People’ and ‘This Nation,’ ” 195).

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 34

Haggai himself, before the work of rebuilding the temple commenced, was able to
announce to the people on the Lord’s behalf, ‘I am with you,’ declares the LORD
(Hag 1:13). From such references it is clear that the realization of the divine
presence did not absolutely require the existence of the temple.
Nevertheless, the temple was the defining center for much of Old Testament
Judaism, both from a religious standpoint and from a national standpoint as well.
For that reason, the Babylonian destruction of the temple in 586 B.C. no doubt
produced a level of religious despair and emotional confusion on the part of those
who experienced it that is difficult for modern readers fully to comprehend. When
in 538 B.C. the exile officially ended with Cyrus’s decree permitting the Jews to
leave Babylon and to return to their ancient homeland, the reconstruction of the
demolished Solomonic temple should have been a major priority for all those who
dreamed of a restored nation and a normalized religious life that could once again
fulfill the demands of the Torah. Since in the past the Lord had chosen to identify
himself in such a unique way with Mount Zion and the temple (cf. Ps 78:68–69),
the continuing state of degradation experienced by that structure was for the
faithful Jewish remnant nothing less than an embarrassing reminder of the seeming
absence of their God from their midst. Furthermore, those who were unsympathetic
to the Jewish plight would no doubt have seen the ruined temple as a symbol of the
utter helplessness of Israel’s God, who appeared powerless to act on behalf of his
people by preventing this national tragedy.
In such a context, what gave special significance to the temple was not the
belief that God’s presence could somehow be restricted to a building of this sort.
Rather, its importance derived from its association with the Lord’s name and
person (cf. 2 Chr 6:5–9, 20, 26, 33–34, 38). The logical corollary of this
association was this: to dishonor the temple was also to dishonor the Lord. 71 To
allow the temple to continue in ruins, Haggai maintained, really amounted to a
failure on the part of the people to honor appropriately the God of Israel. 72 It is as
71
For helpful discussion of the significance of temples in ancient Israel and other cultures of the ANE see G. E. Wright, “The Significance of the
Temple in the Ancient Near East. Part 3. The Temple in Palestine-Syria,” BA 7 (1944): 65–77; V. Hurowitz, I Have Built You an Exalted House:
Temple Building in the Bible in Light of Mesopotamian and Northwest Semitic Writings, JSOTSup 115 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press,
1992). On religious and philosophical points of correspondence between heavenly and earthly temples in ANE thought, see A. S. Kapelrud,
“Temple Building: A Task for Gods and Kings,” Or 32 (1963): 56–62. On temples during the Achaemenid period, see J. Blenkinsopp, “Temple
and Society in Achaemenid Judah,” in Second Temple Studies: Persian Period, JSOTSup 117 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 22–53; P. R.
Bedford, Temple Restoration in Early Achaemenid Judah, JSJSup 65 (Leiden: Brill, 2001). On temple taxation and the economy of Achaemenid
Yehud, see J. Schaper, “The Jerusalem Temple as an Instrument of the Achaemenid Fiscal Administration,” VT 45 (1995): 528–39. For a
summary of understanding of the temple in biblical and postbiblical Jewish literature, see L. Schaya, “The Meaning of the Temple,” SCR 5
(1971): 241–46. On the temple in late biblical literature see D. L. Petersen, “The Temple in Persian Period Prophetic Texts,” in Second Temple
Studies: Persian Period, JSOTSup 117 (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1991), 125–44. On the significance of the Jerusalem temple see Meyers,
“Temple,” 350–69. On the role of the temple in the postexilic period see S. Japhet, “The Temple in the Restoration Period: Reality and Ideology,”
USQR 44 (1991): 195–291. On the importance of the temple and the significance of its demise to Jewish apocalyptic literature, see J. J. Collins,
Jerusalem and the Temple in Jewish Apocalyptic Literature of the Second Temple Period, International Rennert Guest Lecture Series 1 (Remat-
Gan: Bar-Ilan University, 1998).
72
D. J. A. Clines’ argument that for Haggai the temple was nothing more than a treasury for storing and displaying valuables comes close to
being a reductio ad absurdum. He disallows that Haggai can properly be viewed as understanding the temple to be a place of sacrifice, a place of
prayer, a location of the presence of God, etc. As a result he attributes to Haggai a severely truncated view of the function of the temple, claiming
that many commentators are guilty of illegitimate totality transfer with regard to the word “temple.” But to situate Haggai’s understanding of the

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 35

though they were unconcerned that the Lord should be left homeless among his
own people, ‘a Jerusalemite vagabond’ as it were.73 To honor God by the
restoration of the temple, however, would bring renewed evidence of God’s
presence with his covenant people, a theme by no means overlooked by Haggai (cf.
1:13; 2:4). In this matter it appears that ‘Haggai was following the ideals of Ezekiel
with regard to the development of a priestly commonwealth, as indicated by the
way he related the prophetic eschatology of salvation to the building of the
Temple.’74
But times were hard for the returnees, and the challenges of king out a meager
existence for themselves and their families must have been physically and
emotionally draining during those early years. Religious enthusiasm for the temple
was quickly eclipsed by the backbreaking rigors of simply making a living in a
land that was not particularly hospitable to their return. To many the time did not
seem right for such an expensive and demanding enterprise as the construction of a
temple worthy of the name would require. It would take a strong prophetic voice to
awaken the returnees’ slumbering conscience and to enthuse in them a committed
spirit to the task at hand. It fell to Haggai to translate a theology of the temple into
a course of individual and corporate action that would be consistent with that
theology.75”76
Mignon Jacobs writes “So central is the building of the house of the Lord to
Haggai that many concur with Knight (New Israel, p. 61) that the book implies that
Haggai ‘took the superstitious view that God had not blessed his people merely
because they had not begun to rebuild the temple.’ Pfeiffer (Introduction to the Old
Testament, p. 603) contrasts Haggai with previous prophets in that his ‘concern
was not the moral and religious wickedness of his people, but adherence to the
rules of Levitical purity and the fulfillment of ritual acts.’ More moderately,
Coggins (Haggai, p. 19) says that Haggai charged the community with ‘failure to
reestablish the regular cultic round in the temple,’ sharing Petersen’s view
(Haggai, p. 49) that without the house the cult lacks normative wholeness. Closer
examination of 2:14 shows, however, that it is the people who render the offerings
‘defiled,’ not defective offerings that defile the people. For Haggai as for earlier

temple within the broader context of the theology of the period, as most commentators seek to do, does not require illegitimate totality transfer to
Haggai of nuances that the word “temple” carries only elsewhere, in the way that Clines avers (p. 57). Although the methodological fallacy of
such totality transfer admittedly is a danger that is present in lexical research, it should not inhibit legitimate attempts to situate the biblical
writers in their historical and cultural milieu, nor should it lead to an excessive isolation of the biblical writers from their proper contexts. In his
attempts to deconstruct the Book of Haggai, Clines has rather surprisingly dismissed a good deal of competent scholarship on Haggai (“Haggai’s
Temple, Constructed, Deconstructed and Reconstructed,” SJOT 7 [1993]: 51–77).
73
The expression is M. C. Love’s (The Evasive Text: Zechariah 1–8 and the Frustrated Reader, JSOTSup 296 [Sheffield: Sheffield Academic
Press, 1999], 174).
74
Harrison, Introduction, 947.
75
For a helpful summary of the theology of the temple, particularly from the standpoint of certain of the psalms, see R. E. Clements, “Temple
and Land: A Significant Aspect of Israel’s Worship,” TGUOS 19 (1963): 16–28.
76
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 75–78). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 36

prophets, the offerer was a key factor in the acceptability of the offerings before
God. To Isaiah (1:10–15), Jeremiah (7:9–11), and Amos (5:21–24), people who
were set on wrong abused the ordinances of God and brought divine condemnation
upon themselves through what God intended for their blessing. Hosea (6:6) and
Micah (6:6–8) emphasized rather that people whose lives were not positively set
upon right abused the divine ordinances, and it is with these prophets that Haggai
is to be associated, especially with Micah. The commands in Exodus 25:8 and
29:44–46 legitimizing the tabernacle say, ‘Make me a sanctuary and I will dwell
among them’ (my translation). The same concept prompted the first house (1 Kings
8:27; see 2 Sam. 7:5)’ and was Haggai’s motivation in pressing for the second.
Had Israel refused to provide the tent in the wilderness, would not the Lord have
replied, ‘Then you do not want me among you’? The order of events in Exodus
through Leviticus shows that the tent comes first as a means of the grace of the
indwelling God and that the cultic, levitical round of sacrifices is necessary
because the Holy One dwells there. The normative heart of the Israelite community
is not the cultus but the indwelling holy God in whose presence his people are
made secure only by the shedding of blood. Haggai stood firmly within this
tradition. The refusal to build the house was the rejection of the offer of grace, the
grace of divine indwelling. But one further clarification is important. Canaanite
religion dealt in techniques—earthly acts supposed to exert pressure on the gods—
but biblical religion deals with obedience. The building of the house is not a cultic
technique whereby humans pressure or even seek to please God; it is an act of
obedience performed in the faith that God will keep his promise. The Lord’s case
against Haggai’s people was simple: “You did not want me” (see the Exegesis and
Exposition at 2:17). Second Samuel 7 binds the Davidic kingship and the Lord’s
house inextricably together. It originated the long tradition whereby the prophets
linked the messianic day to the house concept. In Isaiah the cleansed people and
the newly created city are centered on the Lord’s ‘booth’ (4:2–6), and the
reestablished people rejoice in the courts of his sanctuary (62:9). Jeremiah looks
forward to the day when the Branch shall reign on David’s throne and the levitical
priests minister before the Lord (33:14–26). Ezekiel envisages the temple
community and the indwelling Prince (40–48). Malachi predicts the day when the
Lord shall suddenly come to his temple (3:1–4). Haggai also lived within this
tradition. The presence of the Lord in his house among his people was a pledge of
the great day and the greater coming and presence.”77

Literary Genre and Style

77
Motyer, J. A. (2009). Haggai. In T. E. McComiskey (Ed.), The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary (pp. 964–966).
Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 37

 Zuck writes “Literary genre refers to the category or the kind of writing
characterized by a particular form(s) and/or content. Distinguishing the various
genres (kinds of literature) in Scripture helps us interpret the Bible more
accurately. ‘We do this with all kinds of literature. We distinguish between lyric
poetry and legal briefs, between newspaper accounts of current events and epic
poems. We distinguish between the style of historical narratives and sermons.’78”79
In the Bible, we have what we call the “legal” genre which appears in the
Pentateuch and refers to the body of material that includes commandments for the
Israelites (cf. Exodus 20–40, Leviticus; Numbers 5–6, 15, 18–19, 28–30, 34–35),
and nearly all of Deuteronomy. There are two types of legal material: (1) Apodictic
law which are direct commands (cf. Exodus 20:3–17; Leviticus 18:7–24; 19:9–19,
26–29, 31, 35). The second type of legal material is casuistic law which means
case-by-case law. In these commands a condition setting forth a specific situation
introduces the laws (cf. Leviticus 20:9–18, 20–21; Deuteronomy 15:7–17).
Another genre that appears in the Bible quite frequently, is narrative which is a
story told for the purpose of conveying a message through people and their
problems and situations. Biblical narratives are selective and illustrative. The
biblical narratives are not intended to be full biographies giving every detail of
individuals’ lives. Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, the biblical writers
carefully selected the material they included to accomplish certain purposes.
Biblical narratives usually follow a pattern in which a problem occurs near the
beginning of the narrative, with increasing complications that reach a climax. Then
it moves toward a solution to the problem and concludes with the problem solved.
As the problem develops, suspense usually intensifies, and issues and relationships
become more complicated until they reach a dramatic climax.
There are different types of narratives: (1) Tragedy: A story of the decline of a
person from verity to catastrophe such as Samson, Saul, and Solomon. (2) Epic: A
series of episodes unified around an individual or a group of people. An example
of this is Israel’s wilderness wanderings. (3) Romance: A narrative in which the
romantic relationship between a man and a woman is narrated. The Books of Ruth
and the Song of Songs are illustrations of this kind of narrative. (4) Heroic: A story
built around the life and exploits of a hero or a protagonist, an individual who
sometimes is a representative of others or an example for others. Examples are
Abraham, Gideon, David, Daniel, and Paul. (5) Satire: An exposure of human vice
or folly through ridicule or rebuke. The Book of Jonah is a satire because Jonah, as
a representative of Israel, is ridiculed for his refusal to accept God’s universal love.
(6) Polemic: An aggressive attack against or refuting of the views of others.
78
R.C. Sproul, Knowing Scripture (Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press, 1979), 49.
79
Campbell, D. K. (1991). Foreword. In C. Bubeck Sr. (Ed.), Basic Bible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering Biblical Truth (p.
126). Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 38

Examples of this are Elijah’s “contest” with the 450 Baal prophets (1 Kings 18:16–
46), and the 10 plagues against the gods and goddesses of Egypt.
Another genre that appears in the Scriptures is poetry. Job, Psalms, Proverbs,
Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs are the five major poetical books. But we must
keep in mind that poetry is included in many of the prophetic books such as in
Zephaniah. Wisdom literature is another genre in the Bible. Job, Proverbs, and
Ecclesiastes contain this genre. This type of literature is poetry. However, not all
poetic material is Wisdom literature.
The Gospels are another genre. Some approach the gospel as simply as
historical narratives, as if the books were written simply to record biographical
information on the life of Christ. However, they are not biographies in the normal
sense in that they exclude much material from the life of Christ which one would
normally expect to find in a historical biography. The Gospels include quite a bit of
biographical material on Christ, but they are more than biographies since they
contain both doctrine and narrative, which set forth information on the person of
Jesus Christ. Jesus’ teachings in parables and in direct discourse are interspersed
with the records of His miracles and encounters with individuals.
Another genre that appears in the Bible is logical discourse which is also called
epistolary literature and refers to the epistles of the New Testament, Romans
through Jude are examples of this genre in the New Testament. They contain two
kinds of material: (1) expository discourse: expounding certain truths or doctrines,
often with logical support for those truths (2) hortatory discourse: exhortations to
follow certain courses of action or to develop certain characteristics in light of the
truths presented in the expository discourse material.
Lastly, prophetic literature constitutes another genre that appears in the Bible.
This genre includes predictions of the future at the time of the writing of the
material with injunctions often included that those who hear the prophecy adjust
their lives in light of the predictions. There is also a special form of prophetic
literature, namely, apocalyptic, which focuses specifically on the end times, while
presenting the material in symbolic form.
Zuck writes “An awareness of the literary genre or kind of literature of a given
Bible book helps more in synthesis than detailed analysis. It helps give a sense of
the overall thrust of the Bible book, so that verses and paragraphs can be seen in
light of the whole. This helps prevent the problem of taking verses out of context.
It also gives insight into the nature and purpose of an entire book, as seen, for
example, in the Book of Jonah. Structural patterns help us see why certain passages
are included where they are. Also attention to literary genre keeps us from making

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 39

more of the passage than we should or from making less of the passage than we
should.80
The book of Haggai appears to be a mixture of prose and poetry since the
introductory passages are prose while on the other hand, the messages by the
prophet are poetry since they display features which are typical of Hebrew poetry.
Thus, it can be described as “poetic prose” as Ackroyd suggests. 81 There is
antithetical parallelism which is poetic (cf. 1:6; 2:4). Haggai employs antithesis (cf.
1:6) and rhyme (cf. 1:6, 10; 2:6).
Repetition more than any other feature characterizes the style of Haggai since
he uses the introductory formula “This is what the Lord says” or variations upon
this formula this twenty-six times (1:1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13; 2:1, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10,
11, 14, 17, 20, 23). The phrase śîmû lĕbabkem (‫) ִׂ ֥שימּו ְל ַבב ֶ ְ֖כם‬, “consider your ways”
(ESV) appears three times (cf. 1:5, 7; 2:18). The verb śîmû-nāʾ (‫ֽׂימּו־נ֣א‬ ָ ‫)ש‬,
ִ
“consider” appears in Haggai 2:15 as it does in 2:18. Also, there is obvious
repetition in Haggai 1:14 since the word rûaḥ (ַ‫)רּוח‬, “spirit” occurs three times in
this verse. There is a repetition in Haggai 2:4 since the second person masculine
singular qal imperative form of the verb ḥăzaq (‫) ֲח ַז֣ק‬, “be strong” appears three
times.
Furthermore, the expression ʾănî ʾittĕkem (‫) ֲא ִנ֥י אִתְּ ֶ ֖כם‬, “I am with you” appears in
Haggai 1:13 and 2:4. The phrase dĕbar-yĕhwâ (‫)דְ בַר־י ְה ֜ ָוה‬, “the word of the Lord”
occurs five times (1:1, 3; 2:1, 10, 20). Then, there is the phrase ʾāmar yĕhwâ
ṣĕbāʾôt (‫)ָאמַ ֛ר י ְהוָ ֥ה ְצב ָ֖אֹות‬, “thus, says the Lord of hosts” appears seven times (1:2, 5,
7; 2:6, 7, 9, 11). There is also the phrase nĕʾum yĕhwâ ṣĕbāʾôt (‫ְהו֣ה ְצב ָ֔אֹות‬ ָ ‫)נְאֻם֙ י‬,
“declares the Lord of hosts” which occurs 6 times (1:9; 2:4, 8, 9, 23 twice). Lastly,
the phrase ʾāmar yĕhwâ (‫)ָאמַ ֥ר י ְהוָ ֽה‬, “says the Lord” appears 8 times (1:2, 5, 7, 8;
2:6, 7, 9, 11).
Another feature which demonstrates the literary ability of Haggai is his use of
rhetorical questions. Zuck writes “A question is asked rhetorically if it does not
require a verbal response and is given to force the reader to answer in his mind and
to consider the implications of the answer. Quentilian (A.D. 35–100), a Roman
rhetorician, said rhetorical questions increase the force and cogency of proof.
When God asked Abraham, ‘Is anything too hard for the Lord?’ (Gen. 18:14) He
was not expecting a verbal response. He was facing Abraham with a question to
answer in his mind. The same is true when the Lord asked Jeremiah, ‘Is anything
too hard for Me?’ (Jer. 32:27) Paul asked a rhetorical question in Romans 8:31, ‘If
God is for us, who can be against us?’ These rhetorical questions are ways of
conveying information. The first two questions indicate that nothing is impossible
80
Campbell, D. K. (1991). Foreword. In C. Bubeck Sr. (Ed.), Basic Bible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering Biblical Truth (pp.
127–135). Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook.
81
Journal of Jewish Studies, 2 [1952]; pages 164-65

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 40

with God and Paul’s question in Romans 8:31 affirms that no one can successfully
oppose the believer in view of God’s defense of him. Sometimes a rhetorical
question is directed to oneself as in Luke 12:17, in which the rich man thought to
himself, ‘What shall I do? I have no place to store my crops.’ When Jesus asked
the crowd, ‘Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come out with swords and
clubs to capture Me?’ (Matt. 26:55) His question was to get them to realize He was
not leading a rebellion. A negative response is implied in His questions, ‘Which of
you fathers, if your son asks for a fish, will give him a snake instead? Or if he asks
for an egg, will give him a scorpion?’ (Luke 11:11–12) Some rhetorical questions
rebuke or admonish, others express surprise, some are spoken to get attention…
Sometimes questions are used to rebuke. They too lead the hearers/readers to think.
For example, Jesus asked His disciples, ‘Why are you so afraid? Do you still have
no faith?’ (Mark 4:40) By these questions He was rebuking them for being afraid
and not having faith. Jesus’ words to His sleeping disciples in Gethsemane, ‘Are
you still sleeping and resting?’ (14:41) rebuked them for sleeping. In interpreting
the Bible it is important to be alert to rhetorical questions and to note how they are
being used and the thoughts being suggested by them.”82
The first rhetorical question which appears in the book of Haggai is found in
Haggai 1:4 where the Lord through the prophet Haggai poses the following
question to the Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest and the remnant of Judah, “Is
it a time for you yourselves to dwell in your paneled houses, while this house lies
in ruins?” (ESV) This rhetorical question is used to rebuke the remnant of Judah
for failing to complete the rebuilding of the temple while they sat in their own
homes.
The second rhetorical question is posed by the Lord through Haggai and is
addressed again to Zerubbabel and Joshua and the remnant of Judah and occurs in
Haggai 1:9. The Lord asks “You looked for much, and behold, it came to little.
And when you brought it home, I blew it away. Why? declares the Lord of hosts.
Because of my house that lies in ruins, while each of you busies himself with his
own house.” (ESV) This is also another rebuke of the remnant of Judah for failing
to rebuild the temple.
The third rhetorical question appears in Haggai 2:3 and is again posed by the
Lord through Haggai and is addressed to Zerubbabel, Joshua and the remnant of
Judah. The Lord asks “Who is left among you who saw this house in its former
glory? How do you see it now? Is it not as nothing in your eyes?” (ESV) The
purpose of this question is designed to encourage Zerubbabel, Joshua and the
remnant of Judah to complete the task of rebuilding the temple.

82
Campbell, D. K. (1991). Foreword. In C. Bubeck Sr. (Ed.), Basic Bible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering Biblical Truth (pp.
153–154). Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 41

 The fourth and fifth rhetorical questions appear in Haggai 2:12-13 and are
directed toward the priests. The Lord through the prophet Haggai asks the priests
the following “If someone carries holy meat in the fold of his garment and touches
with his fold bread or stew or wine or oil or any kind of food, does it become holy?
The priests answered and said, ‘No.’ Then Haggai said, ‘If someone who is
unclean by contact with a dead body touches any of these, does it become
unclean?’ The priests answered and said, ‘It does become unclean.’” (ESV) The
purpose of these questions is designed to emphasize with the priests that the
remnant of Judah is unclean and thus the word which they were performing.
The sixth rhetorical question is found in Haggai 2:15-17. The prophet asks
“Before stone was placed upon stone in the temple of the Lord, how did you fare?
When one came to a heap of twenty measures, there were but ten. When one came
to the wine vat to draw fifty measures, there were but twenty. I struck you and all
the products of your toil with blight and with mildew and with hail, yet you did not
turn to me, declares the Lord.” (ESV) This question is emphasizing with the
remnant of Judah that they were not blessed materialistically by the Lord because
of their failure to complete the rebuilding of the temple.
The seventh and final rhetorical question is found in Haggai 2:18-19 and is put
posed by the Lord through Haggai, “Consider from this day onward, from the
twenty-fourth day of the ninth month. Since the day that the foundation of the
Lord’s temple was laid, consider: Is the seed yet in the barn? Indeed, the vine, the
fig tree, the pomegranate, and the olive tree have yielded nothing. But from this
day on I will bless you.” (ESV) This question emphasizes with the remnant that
disobedience to the Lord resulted in the nation being impoverished whereas they
would be blessed materialistically as a result of their obedience to His command to
rebuild the temple.
Richard Taylor provides an excellent discussion regarding the literary style of
Haggai, he writes “The Hebrew text of Haggai is written in what many scholars
have described as a rather awkward or clumsy style. 83 According to some it is for
the most part an unimaginative style that is symptomatic of Hebrew literature
produced in the waning years of biblical prophecy.84 The language of the book,
however, is usually fairly clear and direct,85 so much so that Haggai has been called
‘the most matter-of-fact of all the prophets.’ 86 His language is relatively unadorned

83
See, e.g., Soggin, Introduction, 326; Harrison, Introduction, 947.
84
A. Causse, “From an Ethnic Group to a Religious Community: The Sociological Problem of Judaism,” in Community, Identity, and Ideology:
Social Science Approaches to the Hebrew Bible, Sources for Biblical and Theological Study, vol. 6 (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996), 109.
171
Compared to the other Minor Prophets there is a minimum of uncommon vocabulary in Haggai. See A. S. Carrier, “The Ἅπαξ Λεγόμενα of the
Minor Prophets,” Heb 5 (1889): 209–14.
85
Compared to the other Minor Prophets there is a minimum of uncommon vocabulary in Haggai. See A. S. Carrier, “The Ἅπαξ Λεγόμενα of the
Minor Prophets,” Heb 5 (1889): 209–14.
86
A. C. Jennings, “Haggai,” in Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi, Layman’s Handy Commentary Series (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1961), 11.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 42

and straightforward; it is not ornate from a literary standpoint. 87 Haggai’s style
does not rise to the rhetorical heights of the major prophets, although it is not
completely lacking in certain rhetorical and stylistic devices.
Even though his style is not altogether unlike that of certain Old Testament
prophets, Haggai need not be viewed as dependent on other prophets for his style
of writing. Haggai exhibits certain parallels to Jeremiah’s style, but claims of
imitation are exaggerated.88 The occasional clumsiness of the book seems to be due
in part to the emotive nature of the speeches whose oral form has been partly
retained in the written form of these addresses. Ackroyd suggests that Haggai
incorporated certain didactic and homiletic elements into the oracular style that
characterizes the writing of earlier prophets.89 Haggai’s mission was to enlist and
motivate by every legitimate means at his disposal and at times even to embarrass,
humiliate, and cajole those who had returned from the exile to complete the
important task that lay before them.90 The urgency of his mission has left its impact
on the style of the book.
Some scholars have attempted to improve upon the style of Haggai by
suggesting various emendations that are lacking in adequate manuscript support.
Textual criticism undertaken for this purpose will seldom lead to sound
conclusions. The text-critical canon of lectio difficilior teaches us that given a
choice between a difficult reading and an easy one, the more difficult reading
usually has greater claim to originality. The reason for this is obvious: scribes
tended to smooth texts out, and not (at least consciously) to make them more
difficult. Biblical writers sometimes wrote in styles that were not models of literary
excellence. The task of an interpreter is not to improve upon the style of an ancient
author but rather to listen carefully to what that author has said and to seek to
understand the precise meaning of his text. 91 The occasional awkwardness of the

87
To describe Haggai’s style I have borrowed the word “unadorned” from previous scholars such as Pfeiffer, Stuhlmueller, and Kirkpatrick,
since this seems to be a particularly appropriate way to summarize the style of the book. Driver uses the word “unornate” in summarizing
Haggai’s style, which also is an accurate label for this purpose. Stuhlmueller goes a bit further, speaking of what he calls Haggai’s “meagre and
starved style,” and according to Kirkpatrick, Haggai’s style is “thin and meagre.” Other scholars use even more pointed language. E.g., Smith
refers to Haggai’s “crabbed style.” De Wette says, “The style is devoid of all spirit and energy”; the language, according to him, is “somewhat
Chaldaic, and poor.” But such terms as these seem to be needlessly pejorative and perhaps even a bit biased in their lack of appreciation for
Haggai’s language and style. See further R. H. Pfeiffer, Introduction to the Old Testament (London: Adam & Charles Black, 1948), 603;
Stuhlmueller, Rebuilding with Hope, 18, 15; S. R. Driver, An Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament, 5th ed., International
Theological Library (Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1894), 321; A. F. Kirkpatrick, The Doctrine of the Prophets: The Warburtonian Lectures for 1886–
1890, 3d ed. (London: Macmillan, 1901), 430–31; G. A. Smith, Twelve Prophets, 252; W. M. L. de Wette, A Critical and Historical Introduction
to the Canonical Scriptures of the Old Testament, vol. 2, 2d ed. (Boston: Little, Brown & Co., 1850), 471, 472.
88
Peckham considers the parallels to constitute imitation (History and Prophecy: The Development of Late Judean Literary Traditions, ABRL
[New York: Doubleday, 1993], 741). But the evidence he cites is not entirely persuasive (pp. 748–50).
89
P. R. Ackroyd, “Haggai,”in Harper’s Bible Commentary (New York: Harper & Row, 1988), 745.
90
B. W. Anderson remarks, “Haggai preached with the fire of nationalism in his words” (Understanding the Old Testament, 4th ed. [Englewood
Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1986], 518). Although there is a sense in which this is a correct assessment, the notion of nationalism should be balanced
with Haggai’s emphasis on religious priorities and obedience to the divine will.
91
On the presence of anomalies of language in the biblical text and a caution against too readily assuming that such things are due to textual
disturbance, see F. I. Andersen, “Linguistic Coherence in Prophetic Discourse,” in Fortunate the Eyes That See: Essays in Honor of David Noel
Freedman in Celebration of His Seventieth Birthday (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1995), 137–56.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 43

language of this book is not something for modern scholars to attempt to eliminate
by emendation. Rather, it may be a genuine reflection of the author’s style.
Certain evidences of literary artistry are also present. Such elements bear
witness to the literary skill of the author. These rhetorical features found in the
book may now be briefly summarized.
Wordplay. In several places in Haggai we find wordplays or puns that are
obvious in the Hebrew text but are very difficult to preserve in translation. For
example, 1:4, 9, 11 is linked by a lexical thread that hints at the reciprocal
connection between the condition of the temple and the condition of the land. In
vv. 4 and 9 the temple is said to be a ‘ruin’ (ḥārēb), and in v. 11 the land is said to
suffer from ‘drought’ (ḥōreb).92 The relationship is one of cause and effect;
because the temple had been left in ruins, the Lord had punished the people by
sending drought to their land. The choice of words serves to call attention to the
connection between these two things. Another example of wordplay is found in
1:6, 8–9, where several forms of the verb bôʾ (“to come”) are used. In v. 6 the
people have ‘harvested’ (hābēʾ) little in spite of their efforts at sowing. In v. 8 they
are admonished to ‘bring’ (hăbēʾtem) timber to be used in construction. And in v. 9
the Lord scatters the wages that they ‘bring’ (hăbēʾtem) home. The same verb is
used with various nuances, providing a lexical link between the selfishness that is
the spiritual cause of the people’s problems and the preparation for construction
efforts that will lead to its solution.
Repetition. Haggai frequently makes use of repetition as a structural and
rhetorical device. For example, stereotypical formulae attaching divine authority to
the prophetic message appear surprisingly often in Haggai for this to be such a
short book. The following phrases occur a total of twenty-six times within the
space of a mere thirty-eight verses: ‘the word of the LORD came through’ (or “to”)
the prophet Haggai (1:1, 3; 2:1, 10, 20); ‘this is what the LORD Almighty says’
(1:2, 5, 7; 2:6, 11); ‘declares the LORD Almighty’ (1:9; 2:4, 7, 8, 9[2x], 23[2x]);
‘says the LORD’ (1:8; 2:4[2x], 14, 17, 23); ‘the voice of the LORD their God’
(1:12); ‘this message of the LORD’ (1:13). Clearly the prophet is anxious to
emphasize the divine origin of his message. The imperative ‘give careful thought’
or ‘give careful thought to your ways’ is also a favorite of Haggai, occurring five
times (1:5, 7; 2:15, 18[2x]). The words ‘I am with you,’ an assurance of divine
presence, appear in 1:13 and 2:4. The word ‘spirit’ occurs three times in 1:14. ‘Be
strong’ is found three times in 2:4, following a pattern probably taken from Josh
1:6–9. The warning ‘I will shake,’ referring either to ‘the heavens and the earth’ or
to ‘all nations,’ appears in 2:6–7, 21. The phrase ‘is mine,’ referring to the wealth
of the nations, is repeated in 2:8, and ‘I will overturn’ (or “overthrow”) is repeated
in 2:22. In these cases the repetition has the effect of underscoring divine
92
The Hb. words in question here are ‫;חרב‬
ֵ (“ruin”) and ‫“( ח ֶֹרב‬drought”). Cf. ‫“( ֶהח ָָרבַה‬the dry ground”) in Hag 2:6.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 44

sovereignty. Details of family connection and official position for Zerubbabel and
Joshua, though provided initially in 1:1, are repeated in 1:12, 14; 2:2, 4, 21, 23.
The use of repetition is the most common rhetorical device found in the Book of
Haggai.
Rhetorical questions. Haggai is fond of asking questions that are intended to
bring his audience to certain conclusions. These questions are rhetorical in the
sense that they are not asked in order to provide information to the asker. Rather,
they are intended to awaken in the hearer or reader an awareness of conditions the
asker knows all too well.93
The main examples of this technique in the Book of Haggai are as follows. In
1:4, in response to the people’s claim that the time has not yet arrived for the
rebuilding of the temple, the prophet presents the Lord as asking whether it is time
for them to provide comfortable dwellings for themselves. The question effectively
calls attention to the inverted priorities of the people. In 1:9 the prophet asks why
they have so little in spite of all their hard work. He then provides an answer to the
question, one that calls attention to divine displeasure over the desolate condition
of the temple. The question framed in 1:9 is a particular form of the rhetorical
question in which the prophet goes on to answer the question he has raised. This
sort of question/answer schema is a common form that appears elsewhere both in
prophetic and in extrabiblical literature.94 Whedbee has discussed in some detail
this feature of Haggai as found in 1:9–11, concluding that it is an important
structural key for understanding Haggai’s didactic strategies. It is, as he says, the
glue by which the various parts of that pericope are held together.95
Other examples of this device occur as well. In 2:3 Haggai asks who among the
people had seen the former temple in its glory. The question implies, first, that
there are few among them of sufficient age to have done so and, second, that those
few of whom this is true will without hesitation affirm the superiority of the former
structure. In 2:12–13 the prophet sets forth certain questions that the people are to
ask of the priest. The prophet knows the answers to the questions, but they are
intended to bring his audience to the same conclusions. In 2:19 he asks whether
there is any residue left from the harvest. Given the fact that it was winter, and the
seed had been planted earlier in the fall, the question apparently calls for a negative
answer.

93
As C. F. Keil says, Haggai “seeks to give liveliness to the discourse by frequently making use of interrogation” ( Introduction to the Old
Testament (1869; reprint, Peabody: Hendrickson, 1988), 1:420.
94
See, e.g., the helpful discussion in B. O. Long, “Two Question and Answer Schemata in the Prophets,” JBL 90 (1971): 129–39. Long identifies
two separate question/answer schemata found in the prophets, distinguished in part by the presence or absence of direct quotation in the question
and answer.
95
J. W. Whedbee, “A Question-Answer Schema in Haggai 1: The Form and Function of Haggai 1:9–11,” in Biblical and Near Eastern Studies:
Essays in Honor of William Sanford LaSor (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1978), 189.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 45

 Linguistic features. The Book of Haggai shows a preference for certain
grammatical forms that characterize the style of this book. 96 Haggai is
characterized by a fairly large number of imperative verbs for such a short book.
The imperative is used fifteen times in Haggai’s thirty-eight verses (1:5, 7, 8[3x];
2:2, 4[4x], 11, 15, 18[2x], 21). These fifteen imperatives underscore both the
urgency of Haggai’s message and the necessity of an appropriate response on the
part of the people. If they were to be obedient to the revealed will of the Lord,
Haggai’s audience had no choice in the matter of the temple. They must
demonstrate a spirit of sacrificial obedience and commitment to proper priorities.
Frequent use of the imperative in Haggai underscores this need for action on the
part of the people.
Another grammatical form that finds frequent use in Haggai is the infinitive.
Besides the stock infinitive construct lēʾmōr (“saying”) used to introduce direct
discourse in the book (1:1, 2, 3, 13; 2:1, 2, 10, 11, 20, 21), other infinitive construct
forms appear an additional ten times in the book (1:2[2x], 4, 6[3x]; 2:5, 15,
16[2x]). In another seven instances the infinitive absolute is employed in this book
(1:6[5x], 9[2x]). Haggai 1:6 is particularly heavy with the infinitive absolute; it is
used five times in that verse alone. Such usage may be indicative of a particularly
lively style of Hebrew discourse.97 The participle is used some eleven times in
Haggai, with a variety of syntactical functions (1:4, 6[3x]; 2:3[2x], 5, 6, 21,
22[2x]).
The Hebrew style of the Book of Haggai is thus characterized on the one hand
by a certain awkwardness at times and on the other hand by an effective use of
certain rhetorical devices. The book retains some of the oral flavor of its sermons,
while also giving evidence of more complex features that befit a literary
composition. There is ample reason for concluding that Haggai was one of the
most effective rhetoricians to be found among the biblical prophets of the
postexilic period.98
Scholars are not agreed about whether the Book of Haggai contains material
that can properly be described as poetry.99 Some see virtually no evidence of poetic

96
On certain aspects of the grammatical structure of Haggai see L. Bauer, Zeit des zweiten Tempels–Zeit der Gerechtigkeit: Zur sozio-
ökonomischen Konzeption im Haggai–Sacharja–Maleachi–Korpus, BEATAJ 31 (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 1992), 64–76.
97
André, e.g., comments: “Dans le discours animé l’infinitif absolu s’emploie au lieu des autres temps ou modes pour mieux mettre en saillie
l’idée du verbe. S’il est employé à la suite d’une autre forme verbale, c’est le temps ou le mode de cette dernière qu’il exprime ” [In animated
discourse the infinitive absolute is used in place of another tense or mode to set forth better the verbal idea. When it is used after another verbal
form, it is the tense or mode of this latter form that it expresses] (Le prophète Aggée, 202–3).
98
For a helpful development of this point see M. J. Boda, “Haggai: Master Rhetorician,” TynBul 51 (2000): 295–304.
99
See, e.g., H. G. Reventlow’s comments on Haggai’s language in Die Propheten Haggai, Sacharja und Maleachi, ATD (Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1993), 6–7. In fact, some scholars regard the distinction between poetry and prose as not really native to biblical texts
and therefore irrelevant to their analysis. See, e.g., J. L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry: Parallelism and Its History (New Haven: Yale
University Press, 1981), esp. pp. 59–95.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 46

structure in Haggai.100 Others think that almost the entire book is poetry. 101 There
are also those who find in Haggai a good deal of poetry that is embedded within a
nonpoetic narrative framework.102
As Petersen has pointed out, these different viewpoints have influenced the
layout of the Hebrew text of Haggai in editions of the Hebrew Bible and, we might
add, that of modern translations as well.103 Procksch, who edited Haggai for BHK,
presented the book in prose form, allowing for no poetry at all. Likewise in the
NIV and the NRSV the entire book is presented as prose.104 On the other hand,
Elliger, who edited the book for BHS, presented as poetry thirty-one verses out of a
total of only thirty-eight verses in the book (1:4–11; 1:15 [taken with 2:15–19];
2:3–9, 14–19, 20–23). Whether this much can properly be regarded as poetry rather
than prose is doubtful. That certain portions of this book are more poetic than
prose, however, seems clear. Both the metrical structure and the preponderance of
rhetorical elements in various portions of the book support this conclusion.
In a study devoted to the musical background of the Book of Haggai,
Christensen has attempted to demonstrate a rhythmic structure for the entire
book.105 He maintains that Haggai consists of three cantos (1:1–14; 1:15–2:9; 2:10–
23), each of which is characterized by rhythmic structure and careful symmetry. 106
Christensen suggests that the imperative verb found in 2:4 (waʿăśû, “and do”),
which stands at the center of the book when viewed this way, may actually be a
well-placed summary of the book’s essential message. He takes the implied object
of the verb to be sacrifice and celebration in connection with the work on the
temple. Whether or not one accepts all of the details of Christensen’s presentation,
he seems to have succeeded in underscoring the literary art and unity of the Book
of Haggai.

100
Soggin, Introduction, 325. D. J. Wiseman also describes Haggai’s style as consisting more of prose than poetry. He says of Haggai, “He
employs a rhythmic prose style rather than the common poetic form often characteristic of the prophets (but cf. 2:4, 5, 14)” (“Haggai,” in The
New Bible Commentary, Revised [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1970], 782). Peckham has also concluded that Haggai is written in prose (History
and Prophecy, 741,756). Matthews says, “The book is very ordinary prose. It is abrupt, often awkward and repetitious” (“Haggai,” vi).
101
Sellin, e.g., makes the following comment: “Haggai’s sayings are not in prose; they are preserved in the metrical form of short verses”
(Introduction, 238).
102
See, e.g., R. L. Alden, “Haggai,” in EBC, vol. 7 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1985), 573–74. Alden says, “The Book of Haggai is a mixture of
prose and poetry” (p. 573). VanGemeren describes the book as what he calls poetic prose (Interpreting the Prophetic Word, 188).
103
Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1–8, 32.
K
BHK Biblia Hebraica, ed. R. Kittel
V
NRSV New Revised Standard Version
104
By way of comparison the NAB treats about half of the book (eighteen verses) as prose and the other half (twenty verses) as poetry.
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
S
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia
105
D. L. Christensen, “Poetry and Prose in the Composition and Performance of the Book of Haggai,” in Verse in Ancient Near Eastern Prose,
AOAT 42 (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1993), 17–30. Essentially the same essay appeared in id., “Impulse and Design in the Book
of Haggai,” JETS 35 (1992): 445–56.
106
Elliger also provides a metrical analysis of those parts of the book he regards as poetry (Die Propheten Nahum, Habakuk, Zephanja, Haggai,
Zacharja, Maleachi, in Das Buch der zwölf kleinen Propheten, ATD 25 [Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1982], esp. pp. 85, 89, 91, 93, 96–
97).

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 47

 Some scholars link discussion of poetry in Haggai to certain conclusions
concerning the redactional history of the book. Bloomhardt, for example, sees in
Haggai four separate poems that in their original form lacked certain secondary
accretions that are present in the canonical form of the book. 107 The four poems in
his view are as follows: the first consists of 1:2, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11, 8, 13; the second
consists of 2:21–23; the third consists of 2:3–9; and the fourth consists of 2:12–16,
18–19. Bloomhardt maintains that at various points a later hand has injected into
these poems the narrative passages. His reconstruction of these poetic passages
requires stripping out a good deal of narrative material, especially in the first poem.
This leaves his analysis with an impression of artificiality and special pleading. If
Bloomhardt’s reconstruction is correct, it would appear that the editor who
introduced the narrative material did so without an appreciation of the poetic form
he was disturbing.
The lack of consensus on whether Haggai is poetry or prose highlights the need
for an objective method by which to distinguish between Hebrew prose and poetry.
Observing the relative frequency of certain common particles such as the relative
pronoun (ʾăšer), the accusative marker (ʾet), and the definite article (ha-) may be
helpful in this regard. Freedman has shown that in classical Hebrew prose texts
these particles are used approximately eight times as often as they are in classical
Hebrew poetry.108 In the case of Haggai (which Freedman does not discuss) the
first two of these particles are used significantly more often than they are in such
texts as Psalms, Job, and Proverbs but significantly less often than they are used in
such texts as Genesis, Deuteronomy, and Joshua. In this regard Haggai seems to
stand somewhere between Old Testament texts that are clearly prose and those that
are clearly poetry.109 This tends to confirm the impression gained from certain
rhythmical and rhetorical features that Haggai may be an example of Kuntsprosa,
or elevated prose,110 frequently leaning in the direction of poetry while at the same
time retaining many elements of prose literature.”111

Structure

107
Bloomhardt, “Poems of Haggai,” 153–95.
108
D. N. Freedman, “Prose Particles in the Poetry of the Primary History,” in Biblical and Related Studies Presented to Samuel Iwry (Winona
Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1985). See also F. I. Andersen and A. D. Forbes, “ ‘Prose Particle’ Counts of the Hebrew Bible,” in The Word of the Lord
Shall Go Forth: Essays in Honor of David Noel Freedman in Celebration of His Sixtieth Birthday , ASOR Special Volume Series, no. 1 (Winona
Lake: Eisenbrauns, 1983), 165–83.
109
Verhoef speaks of Haggai’s “rhythmic prose style,” a designation that seems to allow for poetic features within a generally prosaic style
(Haggai and Malachi, 17).
110
Meyers and Meyers prefer the designation “oracular prose,” a category utilized by Andersen and Freedman in their discussion of statistical
analysis of certain prose particles in Hebrew (Haggai-Zechariah 1–8, lxiii–lxvii).
111
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 66–73). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 48

 The structure of Haggai is built around the four messages contained in the book.
Each presents the date and divine origin of the prophecy as well as the recipients.
The first message was delivered by Haggai on the first day of the sixth month of
King Darius’ second year, which was Elul 1 according to the Jewish calendar,
which in our modern Julian calendar was August 29, 520 B.C. (Hag. 1:1-11). It
was addressed to Zerubbabel, the governor of Judah and Joshua the high priest.
This message accuses the Jewish remnant of abandoning the rebuilding of the
Lord’s temple (1:2-6), which is followed by an exhortation for them to rebuild
again (1:7-8). The Lord asserts that this failure to complete this project is the
reason why they have been impoverished since their return from exile (1:9-11).
The remnant responds to the message by beginning to work on this rebuilding
project (1:12-15).
The second message was also delivered to Zerubbabel and Joshua the high
priest during the twenty-first day of the seventh month Darius’ second year (Hag.
2:1-9). This was the Jewish month Tishri, which according to our modern calendar
would be October 17, 520 B.C. The twenty-first day of Tishri marked the seventh
day of the Feast of Tabernacles (Num 29:32–34). It also coincided with the date
440 years earlier (960 B.C.) when Solomon finished building his temple (1 Kgs
6:38; 8:2)112 (Hag. 2:1). In this message, the Lord through Haggai declares that the
glory of this rebuilt temple will be superior to the glory of Solomon’s temple.
The third message delivered by Haggai to the priests of the Law was on the
twenty-fourth day of the ninth month of Darius’ second year, which was the
twenty-fourth day of the Jewish month Kislev, which in our Julian calendar would
be December 18, 520 B.C. (Hag. 2:10-19). This message asserts that the Jewish
remnant is defiled by sin (2:11-14). The Lord asserts that their poor harvests are
the direct result of their disobedience to His law (2:15-17). However, the Lord also
declares that He will bless them as they rebuild His temple (2:18-19).
The fourth and final message was delivered by Haggai to Zerubbabel only on
the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month of Darius’ second year, which would be
the twenty-fourth day of the Jewish month Kislev, which is December 18, 520 B.C.
in our modern calendar (Hag. 2:20-23). This message contains a Messianic
prophecy. The Lord proclaims in this message that He will judge the Gentile
nations in the future (2:21-22). He also declares that He will restore the Davidic
kingdom (2:23).
The Dictionary of Biblical Imagery has the following article on the structure of
Haggai, they write “The structure of Haggai may be readily discernible, because
four oracles comprise the book. Each oracle begins with the date of the prophecy,
followed by a form of the divine messenger formula (“Thus says the LORD of
hosts”; cf. Hag 1:2; 2:1, 11, 20). The first oracle (Hag 1:1–11) sets forth God’s
112
Biblical Studies Press. (2005). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 49

reproach of his people for not rebuilding his temple. Following this oracle, the
reader is provided with the faithful response of the people to this message (vv. 12–
15). The second oracle (Hag 2:1–9) addresses the complaints of certain members
of the community who feel the new temple pales in comparison to the temple ‘in
its former glory’ (Hag 2:3 NAS B). The third oracle (Hag 2:10–19) explains that the
uncleanness of the people has resulted in their lack of blessing. ‘I smote you … yet
you did not come back to me,’ the Lord chastises (Hag 2:17 NAS B). The last oracle
(Hag 2:20–23) assures the election and exaltation of the Davidic line through
Zerubbabel. A keen observer will note that the four oracles are set in a parallel
pattern, where one and three tend toward indictment, and two and four assure hope
and the blessings of God. Cohesion among these oracles is maintained through the
use of four major literary techniques. First, Haggai has a special affinity for
rhetorical questions. All but the final oracle contain at least one rhetorical
question. The images called to mind are striking (Hag 1:4, 9; 2:3, 12–13, 19).
Second, the repetition of key phrases throughout the text bring a singularity to the
prophecies. ‘Consider your ways!’ Haggai twice writes (Hag 1:5, 7 NAS B), and
again, ‘Consider from this day onward’ (Hag 2:15, 18 NASB). Likewise, the Lord
twice states that he is “going to shake the heavens and the earth” (Hag 2:6, 21
NASB), calling to mind the imagery of an eschatological earthquake familiar to
apocalyptic imagery (cf. Rev 6:12; Heb 12:26). Third, despite the prose style of
Haggai, there is the use of parallelism. Haggai utilizes antithetical parallelism (i.e.,
the juxtaposition of opposites) as a means to intensify his message. For example, in
chapter 1: ‘You have sown much but harvest little’ (Hag 1:6; see also Hag 1:4, 9–
10). Fourth, allusions to other texts and quotations abound as well. Haggai 1:6 has
striking connection with Deuteronomy 28:38–40, and 2:17 with verse 22 of
Deuteronomy 28. Indeed, the whole context of blessings and cursings undergird
the tone of these oracles. The command to Zerubbabel and to Joshua, the high
priest, to ‘take courage’ echoes the same command given in Joshua 1:9 before the
entry of Joshua and the children of Israel into the Promised Land. Also, twice the
Lord tells the restored remnant, ‘I am with you.’ These words call the reader back
to the covenantal promises of God made during the time of the Patriarchs and
Moses (see Gen 46:3; Ex 3:12; etc.) and are magnified through the promise of
Immanuel, ‘God with us,’ found in Isaiah’s prophecy (Is 7:14).”113
E. Ray Clendenen writes “Haggai’s four sermons (1:1–15; 2:1–9; 2:10–19;
2:20–23) are marked by introductory date formulae. But repetition between
B
NASB New American Standard Bible
B
NASB New American Standard Bible
B
NASB New American Standard Bible
B
NASB New American Standard Bible
B
NASB New American Standard Bible
113
Ryken, L., Wilhoit, J., Longman, T., Duriez, C., Penney, D., & Reid, D. G. (2000). In Dictionary of biblical imagery (electronic ed., p. 358).
Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 50

messages one and three and between two and four shows that the book has a
twofold structure. Both messages one and three refer to ‘this people’ (1:2; 2:14)
and include two commands to ‘think/consider carefully’ (1:5, 7; 2:15, 18).
Messages two and four both have the divine promise, ‘I am going to shake the
heavens and the earth’ (2:6, 21) and have a threefold repetition of ‘the Lord
solemnly declares’ (2:4, 23). Furthermore, the first and third messages are
introduced by complete date formulae, giving year, month, and day, with the order
in the third message reversed. The date formulae introducing the second and fourth
messages have only the month and day, again with the fourth in reverse order.
Finally, at the end of the first and third messages, the date is repeated (1:15; 2:18).
The first two messages both deal with building the temple. The last two messages
do not mention the temple explicitly but move beyond it to issues of defilement
and restoration.”114
The Faithlife Study Bible has the following note, they write “The book of
Haggai contains four dated messages. In the first message (Hag 1:1–11), the
prophet declares that the time has come to honor Yahweh by rebuilding the temple.
The governor Zerubbabel, the high priest Joshua, and the people of Judah respond
positively to this message (Hag 1:12), and Yahweh reassures them of His presence
(Hag 1:13). In the second message (Hag 2:1–9), Yahweh says that the restored
temple will be greater than the previous temple that was destroyed. The third
message (Hag 2:10–19) reveals that the people’s uncleanness—meaning the
impurity that resulted from their sin and failure to keep God’s law—played a part
in their difficulties. However, Yahweh will still bless them from that day forward:
The return of Yahweh’s people to Him and the laying of the new temple’s
foundation represents a critical juncture, one that will result in His blessing. In the
fourth and final message (Hag 2:20–23), Yahweh announces that He will
overthrow existing powerful nations and use Zerubbabel as a signet ring—a sign of
Yahweh’s rule manifest through the servanthood of Zerubbabel.”115

Text

There are not many problems with the text of book of Haggai. Thus, it has not
been the subject of much controversy regarding its text. However, some scholars
reject 1:7b and 13 as later interpolations and some also accept minor revisions in
1:9 and 12 based upon ancient versions. The text of the LXX contains an addition
in Haggai 2:9, which does not appear in the MT.

114
Brand, C., Draper, C., England, A., Bond, S., Clendenen, E. R., & Butler, T. C. (Eds.). (2003). Haggai, Book Of. In Holman Illustrated Bible
Dictionary (p. 702). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.
115
Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible.
Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 51

 This author’s translation and commentary on Haggai is based upon the Hebrew
text of Haggai as presented in Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia,116 as well as the
primary ancient versions of the Hebrew text. The early manuscript evidence for
Haggai and the other Minor Prophets reveals that there were at least three different
forms of the Hebrew text for these prophets in antiquity. The first is the forerunner
of the Masoretic text, which follows the early eleventh century Masoretic
manuscript B19A which is our earliest dated Hebrew manuscript containing all of
the Old Testament. However, this manuscript is more than a millennium and a half
removed from the original autograph of Haggai.
The second form of the Hebrew text of the Minor Prophets is the Qumran
Manuscripts of the Minor Prophets. Fragments of seven Hebrew manuscripts
containing portions of the Minor Prophets were discovered in a cave at Qumran in
1952. Richard Taylor writes “These fragments of the Minor Prophets are now
designated as 4QXIIa, b, c, d, e, f, g.117 The oldest of them (i.e., 4QXII a and 4QXIIb)
date to the second half of the second century B.C. (ca. 150–125 B.C.), and the
youngest of them (i.e., 4QXIIg) dates to the second half of the first century B.C.
(ca. 50–25 B.C.). This means that the earliest of these manuscript fragments are
among the oldest of the Dead Sea Scrolls.118 In their original form these
manuscripts apparently contained the text of all twelve of the Minor Prophets,
although the manuscripts are in a poor state of preservation. Judging from the
number of manuscripts involved, it appears that the Minor Prophets were an
especially valued part of the ancient library at Qumran. This conclusion is borne
out by the existence at Qumran of commentaries on certain of these prophets, the
best known of which is the Habakkuk commentary. 119 Small portions of the Book
of Haggai are found in two of these fragments; 4QXII b (= 4Q77) has portions of
Hag 1:1–2; 2:2b–4, and 4QXIIe (= 4Q80) has a few words from Hag 2:18–19 and a
few words from 2:20–21. According to Fuller, the text of 4QXII b is generally
closer to the MT, whereas the text of 4QXIIe is closer to the LXX.120 These small
portions, however, are too limited in scope to be of much help for the text-criticism

116
K. Elliger and W. Rudolph, eds., BHS (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1967–1977).
117
R. E. Fuller has published the editio princeps of these MSS in Qumran Cave 4, vol. 10, The Prophets, DJD 15 (Oxford: Clarendon, 1997),
221–318. See also id., “The Minor Prophets Manuscripts from Qumrân, Cave IV” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 1988).
118
See F. M. Cross, The Ancient Library of Qumran, 3d ed. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995), 44, 121, n. 2. See also id., “The Oldest Manuscripts
from Qumran,” JBL 74 (1955): 147–72; R. Fuller, “The Text of the Twelve Minor Prophets,” CurBS 7 (1999): 83.
119
Portions of pesharim from Qumran have been identified for the following Minor Prophets: Hosea, Amos, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk,
Zephaniah, and possibly Malachi. These commentaries, only partially preserved, were found in Qumran caves one, four, and five.
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
120
See Fuller, “Text of the Twelve Minor Prophets,” 86.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 52

of Haggai. They provide no textual variations from the M T of Haggai other than
orthographic variants.121”122
The third form of the Hebrew text of the Minor Prophets are the Greek
Septuagint, the Syriac Peshitta and the Latin Vulgate. Usually, these versions
provide support for the MT. However, there are some places where they depart
from the MT.
Eugene Merrill writes “Well-informed students of Scripture are aware that the
original texts of the Bible have long since disappeared. In the case of the Hebrew
manuscripts of the OT, what survive are copies of copies multiplied several times
over. Complicating matters further are the varying readings attested in ancient
versions such as the Greek Septuagint, the Aramaic Targums, Syriac, Old Latin,
and many others. Although these frequently agree with the Hebrew Masoretic
tradition, sometimes they do not, therefore presupposing a different, non-Masoretic
line of transmission. All of these witnesses, Hebrew and non-Hebrew alike, must
be consulted in an effort to recover the original text of the biblical composition.
The study of Haggai is largely unencumbered by the problem of textual variation
since the ancient manuscripts and versions differ little from the Masoretic tradition.
The Dead Sea Murabba ‘Jat scroll of the minor prophets of A.D. 150, for example,
offers no improvement on MT Haggai. In fact, Mur differs from MT in only two
minor points: in 2:1 (el for beyad) and in 2:3 (‘ itto for oto).123 The LXX and its
generally dependent offspring such as the Pesh. and Vg, do offer some deviations
from the MT, particularly by expansions of the MT (2:9, 14, 21, 22), arrangements
of verses (LXX 1:9-10 = MT 1:9; LXX 2:1-2 = MT 1:15 + 2:1; LXX 2:15 (last
clause) + 2:16 = MT 2:15), and differences of rendering (cf. 1:1, 14; 2:2, and other
examples in the commentary). The principal versions generally support the MT
and argue strongly, as Verhoef shows,124 against the many alterations of the MT
suggested by both BHK and BHS. That this is the case will be demonstrated point
by point in the commentary.”125
Mignon Jacobs writes “The present translation of the book of Haggai is based
on the Masoretic Text (MT), which is relatively well preserved. BHS identifies
approximately forty-one variants in these two chapters, none of which significantly
alters the primary reading of the text: 1:1bα, 2aβ, 4aβ, 6bβ, 7b, 9aα, 10aα, 10aβ
(2×), 11aα, 11aβ, 12aγ, 13a, 15a; 2:1b, 2b, 4a (2×), 4b, 5aα, (2×), 6aβ, 6bβ, 7ab,
T
MT Masoretic Text
121
E.g., in 4QXIIb the name Darius in Hag 1:1 is spelled with hēʾ rather than wāw as the next to the last letter. Fuller suspects
that this “probably reflects an alternate spelling to ‫ דריהוׁש‬as found in the Wâdi ed-Dâliyeh papyri” (The Prophets, 235).
122
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 93–94). Nashville: Broadman & Holman
Publishers.
123
Benoit, et al., Les Grottes de Murabba’at, 184.
124
Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi, 19-20.
125
Merrill, Eugene H., An Exegetical Commentary: Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; www.bible.org.
S
BHS Biblia Hebraica Stuttgartensia. Edited by K. Elliger and W. Rudolph. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft, 1983

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 53

9bβ, 14b, 15aα, 16aα, 16b (3×), 17aα, 17b, 18b (2×), 19aα, 19aβ, 21b, 22aγ, 22bβ,
and 23aα.62 Several alterations are discussed but deemed unnecessary for
understanding the text (e.g., 1:4, 7, 11; 2:4, 5, 16, 17, 18, 19, 22, 23). Among the
ancient witnesses to the text of Haggai, none consistently deviates from the M T or
supports only one other witness in all points of deviation. For example, the LX X
deviates from the MT in 1:1, 2, 12; and 2:16 but also supports the M T (e.g., 2:10,
11). The fragmentary scroll of the Minor Prophets found at Wadi Murabbaʿat
containing portions of the Haggai text (1:12–2:10; 2:12–23) is not superior to the
MT but preserves readings that are markedly different from the LX X. The
Murabbaʿat fragment exhibits two variants to the MT in 2:1 and 3. There are
several textual challenges attested in the versions and noted tendencies in the ways
the versions handle the text. The LXX’s variant readings include deviations of
meaning (e.g., Hag 1:1, 8) and simple additions to clarify a feature of the text (e.g.,
1:1; 1:12; 2:21). One of its tendencies is to expand the text via explanatory or
reflective statements about a particular aspect of the text. The LX X’s expansion
statements also contribute to the difference in versification (e.g., MT 2:9, 14, 22 =
LXX 2:10, 15, 23). Other tendencies include the harmonization (2:2) or omission of
parts of the text (1:2; 2:5, 10; 2:6a) and an ordering of verses that results in
different versification from the MT. The targum supports the MT in some instances
(1:6, 7, 12, 15; 2:2, 5, 18), deviates from the M T reading in others (1:4, 12, 13;
2:17, 23), and shows support for the LX X at some points. Although the Vulgate
usually supports the MT (1:9, 10, 11), it deviates from it in favor of several
emendations (1:2, 4). In some instances, it supports the LX X over the MT (1:12); it
also deviates from the LXX (1:9; 2:5, 7, 16). The Peshitta usually supports the M T
but also shows a tendency to support the LX X and at times the targum over the M T:

262
For further discussion, see the Text and Commentary section below.
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
T
MT Masoretic Text
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
T
MT Masoretic Text
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 54

for example, like the LXX, the Peshitta deviates from the M T with reference to the
designation of Zerubbabel (the great, the leader of Judah—1:1, 14; 2:2, 21). It does
not, however, adopt the reading of the LXX (of the tribe of Judah). The Peshitta
also supports the LXX and targum at 2:10 contra the M T, reading bəyad (by the
hand) rather than ʾel (to). It also supports the LX X’s omission of the second ʿet
(1:2) and the pronominal suffix “their” from “houses” (1:4), as does the targum.”126

Unity

Richard Taylor presents an excellent treatment regarding the unity of the book
of Haggai, he writes “A reader of the Book of Haggai is at least initially apt to
think that the structure of this book is fairly obvious in that the book is largely a
synopsis of four sermons Haggai delivered to urge completion of the temple. In
each case the sermons recorded are very brief, although it may be assumed the
original oral content of these sermons was considerably longer than their present
written form. The formulaic introductions to the sermons, providing information
regarding date and recipients, can be thought of as the prominent structural
elements for the book.127 In each of the sermons we have a brief account of the
main ideas along with enough historical information to provide an adequate
framework for understanding their occasion and purpose. To summarize these
messages will be to summarize the content of the book itself.
There are five major sections in the book. (1) Following a chronological
introduction (1:1), the first sermon is presented in 1:2–11. It upbraids the people
for their selfishness and informs them that their economic and financial woes are
not merely fortuitous circumstances but are instead the result of divine judgment
for their disobedience to the Lord’s will. (2) This first sermon is followed in 1:12–
15a by a description of the favorable reception of this message on the part of the
civil and religious leadership of the Jews as well as the people themselves. (3) The
second sermon is found in 2:2–9; it is preceded by a brief historical introduction
(2:1). In this message the prophet encourages the people to continue with the
important task of building in anticipation of the eschatological blessing that the
Lord promises will be displayed in the temple. (4) The third sermon, like the
others, is given a historical introduction (2:10), after which Haggai warns the
people of the danger of ceremonial defilement (2:11–19). (5) The fourth and final
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
X
LXX Septuagint
T
MT Masoretic Text
X
LXX Septuagint
126
Jacobs, M. R. (2017). The Books of Haggai and Malachi. (E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, & R. L. Hubbard Jr., Eds.) (pp. 19–20). Grand Rapids,
MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
127
So, e.g., Nogalski, Literary Precursors, 221.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 55

sermon is actually the shortest of the four, consisting of only a few verses.
Following a historical introduction (2:20), Haggai describes Zerubbabel in
eschatological language that is reminiscent of the glories of Davidic kingship,
promising that the Lord will vindicate him and cause him to prosper over his
enemies.
This brief synopsis shows that the Book of Haggai is much more than a
compendium of the prophet’s oracles. It is a record of the contribution that his
prophetic ministry made to the postexilic renewal of Israelite faith and worship that
found expression in the centralized location of the temple. But not all scholars have
been satisfied with such a straightforward reading of this book. Although the
brevity of the book makes dubious those views that argue against its unity, 128 some
scholars have found what they believe to be hints of broken structure within the
book as we have it.129
A fundamental issue regarding the structure of Haggai concerns its literary
relationship to Zechariah, which immediately follows it in the traditional canonical
order. Clearly there is a connection between the two books. Both prophets
preached to those who had returned to Jerusalem after the exile; both were
concerned with the process of restoration; both ministered at about the same time
and in the same historical circumstances. But is there a literary connection between
the two works? Many scholars think so, maintaining that Haggai and Zechariah 1–
8 should be viewed as a single composite book rather than as two separate
prophetic writings. Meyers and Meyers are among those who argue in support of
such a conclusion, pointing out various similarities in theme, date, cast of
characters, program, worldview, stylistic features, genre, and literary structure.
Their conclusion is that ‘Haggai-Zechariah 1–8 is a single compendious work,
published in anticipation of the auspicious event of the temple’s rededication.’ 130
They view the numerous chronological notices found in Haggai and Zechariah 1–8
as creating a structure for this literary unit, and they suggest that it probably was
the author of Zechariah 1–8 who assumed the task of organizing the material.
There is some merit to this view since, as Pierce says, ‘The story is incomplete
without (at least) Zechariah 1–8.’131 Without question Haggai has thematic

128
Mitchell rightly observes, “The book is so brief that it seems almost ridiculous to suspect its unity” (Haggai and Zechariah, 28).
129
For a presentation of the structure of Haggai determined by the division markers of the MT but also taking into account some of the versional
evidence as well, see M. van Amerongen, “Structuring Division Markers in Haggai,” in Delimitation Criticism: A New Tool in Biblical
Scholarship, Pericope: Scripture as Written and Read in Antiquity, vol. 1 (Assen: Van Gorcum, 2000), 64–79.
130
Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, xlvii. See also P. R. Ackroyd, “The Book of Haggai and Zechariah I–VIII,” JJS 3 (1952): 151–
56. More recently S. Sykes has also concluded that Haggai and Zechariah 1–8 are a unit. But Sykes takes the additional step of concluding that
this unit is what he calls a prophetic parody of the Chronicles, one that critiques its worldview and subverts its authority. His analysis has a
suspiciously modern flair to it (“Time and Space in Haggai-Zechariah 1–8: A Bakhtinian Analysis of a Prophetic Chronicle,” JSOT 76 [1997]:
97–124). See also S. Sykes, Time and Space in Haggai-Zechariah 1–8: A Bakhtinian Analysis of a Prophetic Chronicle, Studies in Biblical
Literature 24 (Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang, 2002).
131
R. W. Pierce, “Literary Connectors and a Haggai/Zechariah/Malachi Corpus,” JETS 27 (1984): 280; id., “A Thematic Development of the
Haggai/Zechariah/Malachi Corpus,” JETS 27 (1984): 401–11.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 56

connections to Zechariah that make it advantageous to consider the two books
together, even if the unity may be less tight than the aforementioned view
envisions it to be. Such an understanding of the relationship of Haggai to
Zechariah 1–8 would not necessarily require a separate origin for Zechariah 9–14,
although most advocates of this view would dispute the unity of the Book of
Zechariah on the basis of other considerations.
Craig has recently sought to reinforce the argument for seeing a literary
connection between Haggai and the first eight chapters of Zechariah by calling
attention to the similar use of interrogatives found in these two units of material. 132
He maintains that the interrogatives function as literary threads, serving to heighten
the sense of unity between the two blocks of material. His isolation of this material
in Haggai and Zechariah and his analysis of its four categories (viz., rhetorical
questions, sequential questions, plot-advancing questions, and character-increasing
questions) are very helpful. But that the question material functions as a literary
connector for joining material from these compositions is less clear. It may simply
be an indication of rhetorical techniques shared by the two writers due to their
common world.
The most serious issue of unity yet to have been raised for Haggai concerns the
placement of 2:15–19 and, in connection with that, the identity of ‘this people’ and
‘this nation’ (hāʿām hazzeh, haggôy hazzeh) referred to in 2:14. Rothstein
maintained that 2:15–19 is wrongly placed after 2:14, belonging rather after
1:15a.133 Rothstein’s view on the structure of Haggai, first set forth in 1908, has
been very influential throughout most of the twentieth century.134 The problem
essentially concerns the suitability of 2:15–19 to its surrounding context in Haggai
2. The present location of 2:10–14, according to Rothstein, causes awkwardness in
style and inconsistency in content. Likewise in 1:15 we find a date formula that
does not seem to fit its context, coming as it does at the conclusion of the section
rather than, as we would expect, at its beginning. Rothstein resolved both of these
problems by moving 2:15–19 after 1:15a. He maintained that 1:15a is actually the
introduction to 2:15–19, which somehow became misplaced in the course of
textual transmission. In this case there would be summaries of not four but five
sermons in Haggai. Rothstein further argued that the reference to ‘this people and
this nation’ in 2:14 is not directed toward the prophet’s own community, as

132
K. M. Craig Jr., “Interrogatives in Haggai-Zechariah: A Literary Thread?” in Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve
in Honor of John D. W. Watts, JSOTSup 235 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 224–44.
133
J. W. Rothstein, Juden und Samaritaner: die grundlegende Scheidung von Judentum und Heidentum: eine kritische Studie zum Buche Haggai
und zur jüdischen Geschichte im ersten nachexilischen Jahrhundert, BWA(N)T 3 (Leipzig: Hinrichs, 1908).
134
R. Pfeil, who has traced in some detail the influence of Rothstein’s views on subsequent Haggai scholarship, thinks that the decisive
endorsement came from E. Sellin’s commentary on the Minor Prophets. Due to its popularity, that commentary became a significant conduit for
transmitting Rothstein’s approach to Haggai, particularly in European OT scholarship. As a result, Rothstein’s views exercised considerable
influence on the way subsequent scholars thought about the Book of Haggai. For further discussion see R. Pfeil, “When Is a Gôy a ‘Goy’? The
Interpretation of Haggai 2:10–19,” in A Tribute to Gleason Archer (Chicago: Moody, 1986), esp. pp. 266–72.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 57

appears to be the case if 2:15–19 is allowed to stand in its traditional position, but
is rather a reference to the Samaritans, whose attempts at detraction from and
hindrance to Jewish rebuilding of the temple is described in some detail in Ezra
4:1–5.
But such a relocation of 2:15–19 as Rothstein proposed would create conflict
with the chronological references provided in the two passages. Haggai 1:15a is set
in the sixth month of Darius’s second year, whereas 2:18 is set in the ninth month.
Advocates of this view normally follow one of two courses in order to resolve the
obvious conflict. Either the chronological reference in 2:18 must be deleted
altogether as a secondary gloss,135 or the reference to the ninth month must be
arbitrarily altered to the sixth month in order to agree with 1:15a.136 Neither of
these proposals has sufficient evidence to justify such action.
Rothstein’s thesis yields a very different understanding of this section of
Haggai, since apart from such a dislocation of text as he maintains there is no
censure of the Samaritans to be found in this book. If the text of Haggai is read as
it is, there is no fault attached to the Samaritans for the delay in rebuilding the
temple. Haggai places the blame squarely on the self-centeredness of the postexilic
Jewish community itself.
Rothstein’s thesis cannot be easily sustained. 137 It falters for one very
convincing reason. There is no external evidence in the form of manuscripts or
ancient versions that indicates that 2:15–19 was ever in any position other than the
traditional one. Furthermore, a form-critical analysis of Haggai’s third sermon and
its use of the expression ‘unclean people’ argues in favor of the unity of 2:10–19
and against the relocation of 2:10–14 to a position after 1:15a, as Koch has
effectively pointed out.138 It seems best to reject Rothstein’s attempt to relocate this
pericope and with it his understanding of a negative Samaritan presence in Haggai.
Even less satisfactory is the suggestion to move all of 2:15–23 after 1:15a and to
understand the book to end at 2:14, as some scholars have suggested. 139 There is no
adequate reason for such a radical conclusion.
Haggai 1:15, however, remains a problem in the MT. The second half of the
verse has the formula “in the second year of King Darius,” whereas the
135
See the suggestion to this effect in the apparatus of BHS.
136
So, e.g., J. S. Wright, “Haggai, Book of,” in NBD (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1962), 499.
137
See, e.g., the discussions of Rothstein’s conclusions in K. Koch, “Haggais unreines Volk,” ZAW 79 (1967): 52–66; D. R. Hildebrand,
“Temple Ritual: A Paradigm for Moral Holiness in Haggai II 10–19,” VT 39 (1989): 154–68; H. G. May, “ ‘This People’ and ‘This Nation’ in
Haggai,” VT 18 (1968): 190–97. Koch, in particular, makes a strong case for the unity of 2:10–19 on form-critical grounds, a case so strong in
fact that Hildebrand regards it as “fatal to Rothstein’s displacement hypothesis” (“Temple Ritual,” 159).
138
Koch, “Haggais unreines Volk,” 52–66. See also R. Unger, “Noch einmal: Haggais unreines Volk,” ZAW 103 (1991): 210–25. Although
many scholars continue to assume the accuracy of Rothstein’s conclusions on Haggai, Childs is one who has expressed his agreement with
Koch’s rebuttal of Rothstein (Introduction, 467). Another is Floyd, who speaks approvingly of “the emerging consensus that 2:10–14 and 2:15–
19 belong together” (“Haggai,” 289, 293).
139
So, e.g., I. H. Eybers, “The Rebuilding of the Temple according to Haggai and Zechariah,” in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy
(Potchefstroom: Pro Rege, 1975), 19.
T
MT Masoretic Text

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 58

chronological note in 2:1 lacks such a phrase. One would expect it in 2:1, since
such a note appears in the introduction to the first and third sermons (1:1; 2:10). It
is not surprising that a chronological note is absent in the introduction to the fourth
sermon (2:20), since that message was given on the same day as the third message
and there is no need to repeat the date (cf. 2:10, 19). It seems most likely that the
date formula found in v. 15b actually belongs with 2:1. Its placement there
provides symmetry with the other expressions of date that introduce Haggai’s other
sermons. In that case 1:15a belongs with what precedes in Haggai 1, providing an
explanation of how long the preparations for the building project took after
Haggai’s first message was favorably received, namely, about three weeks. The
LXX, Vulgate, and Syriac Peshitta are thus partially correct and partially incorrect
in their placement of v. 15, in that they position the entire verse at the beginning of
Haggai 2. For the reasons mentioned it seems best to take only v. 15b with Hag 2:1
and to understand v. 15a as the concluding observation of the preceding
pericope.140”141

Themes

The theme of the book of Haggai is one which the church can readily make
application here in the twenty-first century, namely priorities. The Lord and in
particular obedience to the Lord was not the number one priority for the remnant of
Judah upon their return from exile. This was demonstrated by their complete
failure to complete the task of rebuilding the temple, which would serve as the
place in the nation to worship the Lord. The Lord through the prophet Haggai
confronts the priests regarding the ceremonial uncleanness of the remnant which
demonstrated their disobedience to His Law (cf. Hag. 2:11-19). The Lord implores
them to consider their priorities. Therefore, the book of Haggai teaches the church
as it did Old Testament Israel that God’s people must prioritize their lives so that
obedience to the Lord’s commands and prohibitions is their number one priority
rather than placing priorities upon self.
Another theme of Haggai, which is tied to priorities, is obedience to God.
Several times Haggai mentions the consequences for disobedience (cf. Hag. 1:6,
11; 2:16-17). The prophet also mentions the consequences for obedience. God
graciously provides the energy or enthusiasm (1:14), strength (2:4-5) and resources
(2:8) to do His will when the remnant of Judah obey Him (1:12). He also promised

X
LXX Septuagint
140
Contrary to Nogalski, who says: “Nevertheless, the arguments for the relocation are more convincing than the arguments that 1:15a refers
backward. The formula in 1:15a is too similar to the remaining introductory formulas to presume that it functioned as the conclusion to 1:12–14.”
See Nogalski, Literary Precursors, 223 (italics his).
141
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 59–63). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 59

the post-exilic community that He would bless them with His presence (2:9), peace
(2:9) and material prosperity (2:19) if they obey Him.
Lastly, the Messiah is another theme contained in the book of Haggai. Lastly,
the Messiah is another theme contained in the book of Haggai. Chapter 2 asserts
that His glory would fill the rebuilt temple (2:9), which will be fulfilled in history
by Jesus Christ during His millennial reign. In Haggai 2:23, the Lord made
Zerubbabel his “signet ring” as a guarantee that the Messiah would come. The
“signet ring” was a seal of royal authority or personal ownership. Zerubbabel was
owned as the Lord’s “signet ring” in his representative position as the son of
David, not for personal fulfillment in his own lifetime but for messianic fulfillment
in the kingdom of the final Son of David (cf. Luke 1:32–33). The reference to
shaking the earth and sky and overthrowing royal thrones and shattering earthly
kingdoms as well as overthrowing chariots and their riders falling as people kill
each other is a reference to the Second Advent of Jesus Christ.

Purpose

The purpose of the book of Haggai was to persuade the remnant of Judah to
finish rebuilding the temple in order that the God of Israel could dwell with them
as a result of worshipping Him. Almost seventy years had passed since the city of
Jerusalem and Solomon’s temple had been destroyed by the third and final
Babylonian invasion of this city in 586 B.C. At that time, the southern kingdom of
Judah was deported by Nebuchadnezzar. However, the Medo-Persian empire in
fulfillment of the prophecies of Daniel (Dan. 2:32, 39; 7:5, 17; cf. Dan. 5-6)
defeated the Babylonian empire. Then, in 538 B.C., Cyrus the Great announced a
policy, which would allow the Jewish remnant in Babylon to return and reestablish
Jerusalem. Approximately, 50,000 exiles returned under Nehemiah and Ezra. They
offered sacrifices, observed the Feast of Tabernacles and began the work of
rebuilding their fallen temple the next year under the leadership of Zerubbabel and
Joshua (Ezra 1-3). The foundation of the temple was completed with much
rejoicing and singing. However, this enthusiasm was dampened by the efforts of
the Samarian officials who effectively stopped the rebuilding of the temple. But in
520 B.C., the Jews appealed to Darius Hystaspes who authorized the completion of
the temple. Haggai along with the prophet Zechariah exhorted the remnant of Israel
to resume the construction of the temple (Ezra 5-6). Zerubbabel and Joshua the
high priest courageously led the people in rebuilding the temple despite the fact
that Tattenai appealed to Darius to stop their work (Ezra 4-6). The Persian
monarch investigated the matter and issued a verdict in favor of the Jews. After
five years, the remnant of Judah brought to completion the work of rebuilding the
temple (Ezra 5-6).
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 60
 Robert Alden writes “Why did the enthusiasm of God’s people wane? Several
answers come to mind. For one thing, during the seventy years in Babylon, most of
the exiles had come to consider it their home. Further, some Hebrews may have
been doing so well financially that they were reluctant to return to Jerusalem and
face the dangers involved in rebuilding the temple. Or perhaps they were
preoccupied with the injunction of Jeremiah 29:5-7: ‘Build houses and settle down;
plant gardens and eat what they produce. Marry and have sons and daughters; find
wives for your sons and give your daughters in marriage, so that they too may have
sons and daughters. Increase in number there; do not decrease. Also, seek the
peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the
LORD for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper.’…The reconstruction
project may have faltered also because of the unstable political situation that
followed the death of Cyrus in 529 B.C. Cambyses came to the throne and reigned
for seven years. His major accomplishment was his bringing Egypt under Persian
control. The passage of his armies through the land of Israel may have worked a
hardship on the native population. Demands for food, water, clothing and shelter
may have greatly diminished the meager resources of a people engaged on a
building project well beyond their means…The biggest problem the returned exiles
faced was the opposition form the Samaritans and others who lived in the land.
Ezra 4 details the course of events.”142
Mignon Jacobs writes “The message of the book centers around the importance
of obeying God in rebuilding the temple (Hag 1). This message is at once
theological and political, reprimanding and encouraging. Theologically the
message is the fulfillment of the prophecies of Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Micah, and
Isaiah concerning the restoration of Jerusalem. The message represents the reality
of the restoration, including rebuilding during the circumstances of the Persian
Empire and consequent to the persistent ideology of Jerusalem’s exalted status and
God’s universal reign from Jerusalem. The message stands at the boundary
between disillusionment and commitment to the ideology of tradition. Politically,
the rebuilding in Jerusalem is a result of Persia’s policy and effort to expand and
strengthen its Empire. Zerubbabel is part of the Persian political system on the one
hand and a Davidic leader chosen by Yahweh on the other. Although they are
illustrative of loyalty to the Persian Empire, restoring Jerusalem and building the
temple are acts of obedience to Yahweh. Fundamentally, the message of the book
is one of hope that Yahweh is involved in the life of the community and has
authority in the past, present, and future to safeguard the well-being of the
community. God demands obedience and offers the divine presence as the blessing
and reward for that obedience. Finally, God promises to overthrow the nations,
142
Alden, Robert L. The Expositors Bible Commentary, volume 7 (Daniel-Minor Prophets); pages 570-71; Regency Reference Library;
Zondervan Publishing House; Grand Rapids, MI.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 61

possibly signifying the elevated status of God’s people (Hag 2:20–23). In
advocating for the actualization of God’s plan, the message endorses the
destruction of the nations, including the Persian Empire. This is as much a theo-
political message as an eschatological one—theo-political in that it interprets the
political reality in light of theological traditions, and eschatological because its
futuristic language places the manifestation of that reality in the future and makes
it contingent on God’s success in subduing the nations. God’s power is just as
efficacious in moving the community from apathy to action as it is in controlling
nature and the nations for God’s purposes.”143

Theology

The theology of Haggai is rich. First, there is the declaration of the God of
Israel’s sovereignty over Israel and all the nations of the earth, which is expressed
through several phrases. First, there is the phrase ʾāmar yĕhwâ ṣĕbāʾôt (‫ָאמַ ֛ר י ְהוָ ֥ה‬
‫) ְצב ָ֖אֹות‬, “thus, says the Lord of hosts” appears seven times (1:2, 5, 7; 2:6, 7, 9, 11).
The NET Bible has the following note on this phrase, which they translate “the
Lord who rules over all.” They write “The epithet LORD WHO RULES OVER ALL
occurs frequently as a divine title throughout Haggai (see 1:5, 7, 9, 14; 2:4, 6, 7, 8,
9, 11, 23). This name (‫י ְהוָה ְצבָאֹות‬, yéhvah tséva’ot), traditionally translated ‘LORD
of hosts’ (so KJV, NAB, NASB; cf. NIV, NLT “Lord Almighty”; NCV, CEV “Lord
All-Powerful”), emphasizes the majestic sovereignty of the Lord, an especially
important concept in the postexilic world of great human empires and rulers.” 144
Another phrase expressing the sovereignty of God is nĕʾum yĕhwâ ṣĕbāʾôt (‫ְהו֣ה‬ ָ ‫נְאֻם֙ י‬
‫) ְצב ָ֔אֹות‬, “declares the Lord of hosts” which occurs 6 times (1:9; 2:4, 8, 9, 23 twice).
Lastly, the phrase ʾāmar yĕhwâ (‫)ָאמַ ֥ר י ְהוָ ֽה‬, “says the Lord” appears 8 times (1:2, 5,
7, 8; 2:6, 7, 9, 11).
The term “sovereignty” connotes a situation in which a person, from his innate
dignity, exercises supreme power, with no areas of his province outside his
jurisdiction. As applied to God, the term “sovereignty” indicates His complete
power over all of creation, so that He exercises His will absolutely, without any
necessary conditioning by a finite will or wills.

143
Jacobs, M. R. (2017). The Books of Haggai and Malachi. (E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, & R. L. Hubbard Jr., Eds.) (pp. 28–29). Grand Rapids,
MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.
V
KJV The King James Version, known in Britain as the Authorized Version (1611)
B
NAB The New American Bible
B
NASB New American Standard Bible
V
NIV The New International Version
T
NLT New Living Translation
V
NCV New Century Version (1991)
V
CEV The Contemporary English Version
144
Biblical Studies Press. (2005). The NET Bible First Edition; Bible. English. NET Bible.; The NET Bible. Biblical Studies Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 62

 Isaiah 40:15 Behold, the nations are like a drop from a bucket, and are
regarded as a speck of dust on the scales; Behold, He lifts up the islands like
fine dust. (NASB95)
Isaiah 40:17 All the nations are as nothing before Him, they are regarded
by Him as less than nothing and meaningless. (NASB95)
Daniel 2:19 Next in a vision during the night the mystery was revealed to
Daniel. Then Daniel showered the God of the heavens with adoring praise,
honor, recognition and worshipful thanksgiving. 20 Daniel responded and
said: “God has had His name showered with adoring praise, honor,
recognition and worshipful thanksgiving from eternity past and in addition
this will continue throughout eternity future because He inherently is wisdom
as well as power. 21 Namely, He determines the appointed times as well as the
durations of time. He deposes kings as well as elevates kings. He gives wisdom
to wise men as well as knowledge to those who possess the capacity to receive
understanding. 22 God reveals unfathomable events, yes events which are
hidden. He alone knows what is in the darkness. Specifically, the light resides
in Him. 23 For the benefit of You, O God of my fathers, I myself give thanks,
yes and praise too because You gave to me wisdom, yes and power too.
Indeed, now You have made known to me what we requested from You
because You made known to us the king’s secret.” (Author’s translation)
The apostle Paul also taught that the nations receive their time and place as a
result of the sovereignty of God (Acts 17:22-34).
Psalm 66:7 He rules by His might forever; His eyes keep watch on the
nations; Let not the rebellious exalt themselves. Selah. (NASB95)
The humanity of Christ in hypostatic union has been promoted by the Father as
the supreme ruler of history as a result of His victory over Satan at the Cross.
Colossians 2:9 For in Him all the fullness of Deity dwells in bodily form 10
and in Him you have been made complete, and He is the head over all rule
and authority. (NASB95)
Philippians 2:5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ
Jesus 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality
with God a thing to be grasped 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a
bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in
appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point
of death, even death on a cross. For this reason also, God highly exalted Him,
and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name 10 so that at the
name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on
earth and under the earth 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus
Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (NASB95)

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 63

 1 Timothy 6:13 I charge you in the presence of God, who gives life to all
things, and of Christ Jesus, who testified the good confession before Pontius
Pilate 14 that you keep the commandment without stain or reproach until the
appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ 15 which He will bring about at the
proper time -- He who is the blessed and only Sovereign, the King of kings and
Lord of lords 16 who alone possesses immortality and dwells in
unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see. To Him be honor
and eternal dominion! Amen. (NASB95)
Richard Tayler writes “Throughout the Book of Haggai, the Lord is pictured as
an absolute sovereign who, rather than finding his intentions to be influenced
adversely by persons or events outside of himself, is the one who moves in nature
and in human history to bring about the accomplishment of his own purposes. He
is very much in control of nature, as may be seen in the following references in
Haggai. The Lord is capable of manipulating the weather, withholding
precipitation if he chooses to do so (1:10–11). He can determine the success or
failure of the harvest and the economic conditions that are the result thereof (1:5–6,
10–11). He can, if he wishes, cause drought (1:11) and various plant diseases that
destroy crops (2:17, 19). He can send devastating hail and the sirocco, or east
wind, that blows off the Arabian desert and mercilessly ‘blasts’ the crops of Judah
(2:17). The Lord has the power to disrupt the world order, bringing about cosmic
shaking of unprecedented proportions (2:6, 21). He can also bring renewed
prosperity to failed agricultural productions if his people will but respond
appropriately to his warnings (2:19). Not only is the Lord viewed as being
sovereign over nature, he is also sovereign over human activity. It is the Lord who
awakens and stirs the spirit of Jewish leaders and laypeople alike, leading them to
resume work on the temple (1:14). It is the Lord who can bring to nothing the
misplaced efforts of his people to ensure their own advantage while the work of
God suffers due to their inattention to it (1:9). He can even move the leaders of
pagan nations to fulfill his will by contributing their wealth for the building of his
temple (2:7). After all, their silver and gold is not really theirs; it actually belongs
to him (2:8). Those who arrogantly think otherwise will painfully discover that he
can overturn their rule, shatter their power, and destroy their armies (2:22). But
those who serve him will witness the peace, or wellness, that he promises to
provide for his work (2:9). Clearly, in Haggai’s thought Yahweh is a sovereign
Lord. Related to this emphasis on divine sovereignty is the implied notion that by
comparison human beings are powerless to thwart whatever God chooses to do.
Yahweh’s sovereignty is also hinted at in the phrase ‘the LORD of hosts.’ Fourteen
times in this book the Lord is referred to in this way (1:2, 5, 7, 9, 14; 2:4, 6, 7, 8,
9[2x], 11, 23[2x]). The same expression in earlier biblical books often carries
military overtones, with the nuance that Yahweh is ‘Lord over (heavenly) armies.’
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 64
But in the postexilic literature this phrase seems to have become simply a way of
referring to the sovereign Lord.145 As such it emphasizes his ability, indeed his
right, to rule over all creation and to govern the outcome of history. 146 ‘The LORD
of hosts’ is in Haggai a favorite designation for the deity, providing a fitting
complement to this prophet’s thoroughgoing emphasis on the Lord’s
sovereignty.”147
Haggai also describes the God of Israel as intervening in the affairs of mankind
and in particular the remnant of Judah since He exhorts and persuades this remnant
through Haggai to rebuild the temple so He could dwell with them and be
worshipped by them. This is called the “immanency” of God. The immanency of
God means that He involves Himself in and concerns Himself with and intervenes
in the lives of members of the human race, both saved and unsaved.
The Pocket Dictionary of Theological Terms writes immanence is “the idea that
God is present in, close to and involved with creation. Unlike pantheism, which
teaches that God and the world are one or that God is the ‘soul’ (animating
principle) of the world, Christian theology teaches that God is constantly involved
with creation without actually becoming exhausted by creation or ceasing to be
divine in any way.”148
J. I. Packer writes “God is both transcendent over, and immanent in, his world.
These 19th-century words express the thought that on the one hand God is distinct
from his world, does not need it, and exceeds the grasp of any created intelligence
that is found in it (a truth sometimes expressed by speaking of the mystery and
incomprehensibility of God); while on the other hand he permeates the world in
sustaining creative power, shaping and steering it in a way that keeps it on its
planned course. Process theology jettisons transcendence and so stresses the
immanence of God and his struggling involvement in the supposedly evolving
cosmos that he himself becomes finite and evolving too; but this is yet another
unbiblical oddity.”149
145
The word ‫ ְצבָאֹות‬appears in divine titles some 285 times in the Hb. Bible, more often in later writings than in earlier ones. It does not occur at
all in Genesis-Judges. The most frequent users of the expression are Isaiah (62 times), Jeremiah (82 times), Zechariah (53 times), Malachi (24
times), and Haggai (14 times). The expression ‫“( יהוה ְצבָאֹות‬the LORD of hosts”) occurs 265 times; the expression ‫“( יהוה אֱ ֹלהֵי ְצבָאֹות‬the LORD God
of hosts”) occurs 18 times. HALOT summarizes the following views that have been advocated for interpreting the phrase. (1) It portrays Yahweh
as the God of armies; as such he is in charge of his troops. (2) It portrays Yahweh as creator of the stars. (3) It portrays Yahweh as one who has
stripped Canaanite mythological powers of their strength. (4) It portrays Yahweh as in charge of a heavenly household. (5) It portrays Yahweh as
in control of both earthly and heavenly beings. (6) It portrays Yahweh in a general way as almighty; in this case ‫ ְצבָאֹות‬functions as an intensive
abstract plural. It is this latter usage that seems especially to describe the postexilic usage of the phrase ‫ יהוה ְצבָאֹות‬in Haggai and elsewhere. See
further HALOT, 996–97. The most exhaustive treatment to date of the expression ‫ יהוה ְצבָאֹות‬is that of B. N. Wambacq, L’épithète divine Jahvé
Seba’ôt: Étude philologique, historique et éxégétique (Desclée: De Brouwer, 1947). See also T. N. D. Mettinger, The Dethronement of Sabaoth:
Studies in the Shem and Kabod Theologies, ConBOT 18 (Lund: CWK Gleerup, 1982).
146
This seems clearly to be the understanding of the word assumed by the ancient Greek translators. The LXX usually renders ‫“( יהוה ְצבָאֹות‬the
LORD of hosts”) by κύριος παντοκράτωρ (“the Lord Almighty”). But Kessler emphasizes the cultic associations of this term as especially
appropriate to Haggai’s focus on the temple as a divine dwelling (The Book of Haggai, 122).
147
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 80–81). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.
148
Grenz, S., Guretzki, D., & Nordling, C. F. (1999). Pocket dictionary of theological terms (63). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.
149
Ferguson, S. B., & Packer, J. (2000). New dictionary of theology (electronic ed.) (276–277). Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 65

 Mignon Jacobs writes “The affirmation of God’s presence with God’s people is
one of the ways that hope is presented in the book of Haggai (1:13; 2:4–5).
Affirmation of this sort appears intertextually in the Pentateuch (Gen 26:24; 28:15)
and in the prophets (Jer 1:19; 15:20; 30:11; 42:11; 46:28). Even so, the book of
Haggai poses theological challenges with regard to the manifestations of God’s
presence. The divine presence may be manifested in adversity. The futility is the
people’s efforts to achieve the desired outcomes of their labor (1:5–6; cf. Deut
28:1–3 vis-à-vis 28:15–30). The message is that God blesses the obedient and
frustrates the efforts of the disobedient. Haggai’s messages fit into this theme of
retribution (Hag 1:7–11; 2:9, 14–19). The message does not distinguish between
those in the community who were and were not obedient. Rather, it has a corporate
view of the community in that the actions of some may determine the fate of all.
The book of Haggai affirms that God is with the people but also accommodates the
idea of a localized presence—that God’s presence will return when the temple is
rebuilt. Was not God with the people when they were away from Jerusalem? While
living in Babylon, the prophets assured the people that God was with them (Isa
41:10; 43:5; Jer 30:11; 42:11; 46:28). The tradition of the temple as God’s
dwelling place has two main facets. First, the temple is the place of God’s
localized presence in much the same way that God was present on Mount Sinai.
Within this notion is the awareness that God’s presence may be withheld or
withdrawn. Thus, God’s presence is not automatic. In Exod 32–33 God remained
outside the camp in the tent of meeting lest God’s presence consume the people.
The nature of God’s presence may be defined by the nature of the relationship
between God and Israel. Thus, when Israel restores the temple, God will restore the
blessings. The second tradition is seen in 1 Kgs 8:10–27, which both affirms and
challenges the belief of the localized presence. God may choose to reside among
the people, but God’s presence is not limited to a physical structure or location.”150
The book of Haggai also alludes to the God of Israel’s wrath or we can say His
righteous indignation, which refers to His legitimate anger towards evil and sin
since both are contrary to His holiness or perfect character and nature. In fact,
God’s righteous indignation expresses His holiness, which pertains to the absolute
perfection of God’s character. In Haggai 2:10-19, because of His holy character,
the Lord through the prophet Haggai confronts the priests regarding the remnant’s
ceremonial uncleanness, which resulted in His judging them by impoverishing
them.
God’s holiness is expressing the purity of His character or moral perfection and
excellence and means that God can have nothing to do with sin or sinners. He is
totally separate from sin and sinners unless a way can be found to constitute them
150
Jacobs, M. R. (2017). The Books of Haggai and Malachi. (E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, & R. L. Hubbard Jr., Eds.) (pp. 29–30). Grand Rapids,
MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 66

holy and that way has been provided based upon the merits of the impeccable
Person and Finished Work of the Lord Jesus Christ on the Cross.
The presence of evil, sin and injustice is totally absent in the character of God,
thus God does not tolerate evil or sin because it is contrary to His character, i.e. His
inherent moral qualities, ethical standards and principles.
Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary defines “holiness” as “the
quality or state of being holy; sanctity” and they define “sanctity” as, “sacred or
hallowed character.”
One of the definitions that Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary
gives for the adjective “holy” is, “entitled to worship or profound religious
reverence because of divine character or origin or connection with God or
divinity.”
One of the definitions for the noun “character” that Webster’s New Universal
Unabridged Dictionary provides that applies to the context of our passage is the
following: “the aggregate of features and traits that form the apparent individual
nature of some person or thing.”
If we paraphrase these definitions, we would say that the God’s holiness refers
to “the aggregate (i.e. sum total) of perfect features and traits that form the divine
nature of God.”
Therefore, God’s holiness refers to the absolute perfection of His character,
expressing His purity of His character or moral perfection and excellence and
intolerance and opposition and rejection of sin and evil, thus God is totally separate
from sin and sinners. Thus, God’s holiness is related to all of His divine attributes
or in other words, it is simply the harmony of all His perfections or attributes.
Therefore, God’s wrath, which is in reality, righteous indignation is an expression
of His holiness, righteousness and love in opposition to sin and evil.
God’s wrath or righteous indignation is used of God’s settled opposition to and
displeasure against sin meaning that God’s holiness cannot and will not coexist
with sin in any form whatsoever. It is not the momentary, emotional, and often
uncontrolled anger to which human beings are prone and does not refer to an
explosive outburst but rather it refers to an inner, deep resentment that seethes and
smolders, often unnoticed by others as in the case of God’s wrath.
God hates sin so much and loves the sinner so much that He judged His Son
Jesus Christ for every sin in human history-past, present and future and provided
deliverance from sin through faith in His Son Jesus Christ. The only way to avoid
God’s righteous indignation is to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. John 3:36).
The book of Haggai also describes the God of Israel as the judge of all
mankind. In Haggai 2:20-21, as judge of all the nations, the Lord through the
prophet Haggai proclaims that He will shake the earth and sky and overthrow royal
thrones and shatter the might of earthly kingdoms.
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 67
 God has authority to judge since He is the creator. The Scriptures teach of
God’s status as judge (Psalm 75:7; cf. Psalm 50:6; 76:8-9; Ecclesiastes 11:9; Isaiah
33:22; 66:16; 2 Timothy 4:8; Hebrews 12:23; James 4:12). God also decides
disputes (Judges 11:27; cf. Genesis 16:5; 31:53; 1 Samuel 24:15; Isaiah 2:4; Micah
4:3; James 5:9). He presides in the heavenly court in the third heaven (Isaiah 3:13;
cf. Psalm 50:4; 82:1; Daniel 7:9-10; Joel 3:12; Revelation 20:11-15). God is judge
over the whole of creation. He judges the inhabitants of the earth (Genesis 18:25;
cf. Psalm 9:8; 58:11; 82:8; 94:2; 96:13; 98:9). God judges every individual
(Ezekiel 33:20; cf. Ecclesiastes 3:17; Hebrews 9:27; 1 Peter 4:5; Jude 15;
Revelation 20:12). He judges the nations (Joel 3:12; cf. Psalm 9:19-20; 110:6;
Obadiah 15; Zephaniah 3:8). God judges rulers of nations (Isaiah 40:23; Jeremiah
25:17-27; Revelation 6:15-17). He also judges His own people in the sense that He
disciplines them as His children (Hebrews 10:30; cf. Deuteronomy 32:36; Psalm
78:62; Jeremiah 1:16; 1 Peter 4:17). God will judge the fallen angels (2 Peter 2:4;
Jude 6). He judges Satan (Genesis 3:14-15; Matthew 25:41; 1 Timothy 3:6;
Revelation 20:10).
God’s judgment is inescapable in that no one can hide from Him (Obadiah 4; cf.
Genesis 3:8-9; Job 11:20; Jeremiah 11:11; Amos 9:1-4). He searches human hearts
(Jeremiah 17:10; cf. 1 Chronicles 28:9; Psalm 7:9; Proverbs 5:21; Jeremiah 11:20).
God reveals secrets (Romans 2:16; cf. Ecclesiastes 12:14; Jeremiah 16:17; 1
Corinthians 4:5; Hebrews 4:13).
God judged the inhabitants of the antediluvian period by sending a world-wise
flood (Genesis 6:7, 13, 17; 7:21-23). He has judged individuals both believers and
unbelievers (Genesis 4:9-12 Cain; Acts 5:3-10 Ananias and Sapphira; Acts 13:8-11
Elymas the sorcerer). He judged families (Joshua 7:24-25 of Achan; 1 Samuel
3:12-13 of Eli). He has judged cities (Genesis 19:24-25 Sodom and Gomorrah;
Joshua 6:24 Jericho). He has judged nations (Deuteronomy 7:1-5 the Canaanite
nations). He has judged rulers of nations (2 Chronicles 26:16-21 Uzziah; Daniel
4:31-33 Nebuchadnezzar; Daniel 5:22-30 Belshazzar; Acts 12:22-23 Herod). God
judges His own people (Judges 2:11-15; 2 Chronicles 36:15-20; Isaiah 33:22).
God reveals His holy character through His righteous judgments. By judging
men and angels He reveals his sovereignty (Psalm 9:7; 96:10; 99:4; Ezekiel 6:14),
His power (Exodus 6:6; 14:31; Ezekiel 20:33-36; Revelation 18:8), His holiness
(Leviticus 10:1-3; 1 Samuel 6:19-20; Ezekiel 28:22; Revelation 16:5), His
righteous indignation (Nahum 1:2-3; Romans 2:5), His truth (Psalm 96:13;
Romans 2:2; Revelation 16:7), His impartiality (2 Chronicles 19:7; Romans 2:9-
11; Colossians 3:25; 1 Peter 1:17), His compassion (Lamentations 3:31-33; Hosea
11:8-9; John 3:10; 4:2), His patience (Numbers 14:18; Nehemiah 9:30; 2 Peter
3:9), and His mercy (Nehemiah 9:31; Job 9:15; Psalm 78:38; Micah 7:18).

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 68

 God the Father has awarded power and authority over all creation and every
creature to the incarnate Son of God, Jesus of Nazareth, the Christ, because of His
substitutionary spiritual and physical deaths on the cross (Phil. 2:5-11). Because
the Lord Jesus Christ controls history as sovereign ruler of history, He has the
authority to conduct the following judgments and evaluations in the future. The
humanity of Christ in hypostatic union has been awarded the sovereign rulership
over the entire cosmos for His voluntary substitutionary spiritual death on the cross
and as a result has been awarded by God the Father the power and authority to
preside over and conduct the following judgments: (1) Bema Seat Evaluation:
Takes place at the Rapture of the Church and is the evaluation of the Church Age
believer’s life after salvation (Rom. 14:10; 1 Cor. 3:11-15; 2 Cor. 5:10; 1 John
2:24). (2) Israel: Takes place at the Second Advent and is the removing
unregenerate Israel from the earth leaving only regenerate Israel to enter into the
Millennial reign of Christ (Ezek. 20:37-38; Zech. 13:8-9; Mal. 3:2-3, 5; Matt. 25:1-
30). (3) Gentiles: Takes place at the Second Advent and is for the purpose of
removing unregenerate, anti-Semitic Gentiles from the earth (Matt. 25:31-46). (4)
Fallen Angels: Takes place at the end of the appeal trial of Satan which runs co-
terminus with human history and is execution of Satan and the fallen angels’
sentence for the pre-historic rebellion against God (1 Cor. 6:3; 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 6;
Rev. 20:10). (5) Great White Throne: Takes place at the end of human history and
is the judgment of all unregenerate humanity in human history for the rejection of
Christ as Savior (Rev. 20:11-15).
The following groups of regenerate human beings throughout human history
will be subjected to an eschatological compulsory evaluation that the victorious,
resurrected incarnate Son of God as Sovereign Ruler of the entire cosmos will
conduct: (1) OT saints in heaven who lived during the dispensation of the Gentiles
(Adam to the Exodus). (2) OT saints in heaven that lived during the dispensation of
Israel (Exodus to 1st Advent). (3) All Church Age believers (Day of Pentecost to
the Rapture). (4) Regenerate Jews who will live during the Tribulation (Post-
Rapture to the Second Advent). (5) Regenerate Gentiles who will live during the
Tribulation (Post-Rapture to the Second Advent). (6) Regenerate Jews and Gentiles
who will live during the Millennial reign of Christ (Second Advent to Gog and
Magog Rebellion).
The following groups of unregenerate human beings throughout human history
will be subjected to an eschatological compulsory judgment that the resurrected
incarnate Son of God as Sovereign Ruler of the entire cosmos will conduct: (1)
Unbelievers who lived during the dispensation of the Gentiles (Adam to the
Exodus). (2) Unbelievers who lived during the dispensation of the Jews (Exodus to
the 1st Advent). (3) Unbelievers who lived during the Church Age (Day of
Pentecost to Rapture). (4) Unbelievers who lived during the Tribulation (Post-
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 69
Rapture to Second Advent). (5) Unbelievers who lived during the Millennium
(Second Advent to Gog Rebellion).
All fallen angels including Satan himself have already been subjected to a
judgment before human history, but the execution of that sentence has been
delayed because the Supreme Court of Heaven granted Satan and the fallen angels
an appeal trial, which runs co-terminus with human history. The elect angels do not
come under judgment for the very same reason that regenerate human beings don’t
come under judgment because they have exercised personal faith in the Lord Jesus
Christ for salvation.
Every regenerate human being in every dispensation of human history must at
some point in the future submit to an evaluation of their lives after salvation which
will be conducted by the resurrected and sovereign humanity of Christ in
hypostatic union.
Regenerate Israel who lived during the Age of Israel and Tribulation period will
evaluated at the Second Advent (Ezek. 20:37-38; Zech. 13:8-9; Mal. 3:2-3, 5; Matt.
25:1-30). Regenerate Gentiles who lived during the Age of the Gentiles and
Tribulation period will be evaluated at the Second Advent (Matt. 25:31-46).
Church Age believers will be evaluated at the Bema Seat Evaluation of Christ
(Rom. 14:10; 1 Cor. 3:11-15; 2 Cor. 5:10; 1 John 2:24). Regenerate Jews and
Gentiles who lived during the Millennium will be subjected to a judgment at the
conclusion of human history (Rev. 20:15).
Every unregenerate human being in every dispensation of human history must
submit to a judgment, which will also be conducted by the resurrected and
sovereign incarnate Son of God at the Great White Throne Judgment (Rev. 20:11-
15).
Every fallen angel has already been judged and sentenced to the Lake of Fire by
the Supreme Court of Heaven before human history. The execution of that
sentence will not be carried out until the conclusion of the appeal trial of Satan and
the fallen angels (Rev. 20:10).
The book of Haggai also speaks of God’s grace and mercy since the Lord raised
up a remnant in the kingdom of Judah despite their uncleanness and their failure to
rebuild the temple in order to worship Him in this place. In fact, the return of this
remnant to the Lord was based upon God’s grace and mercy.
Grace is all that God is free to do in imparting unmerited blessings to those who
trust in Jesus Christ as Savior based upon the merits of Christ and His death on the
Cross. It is God treating us in a manner that we don’t deserve and excludes any
human works in order to acquire eternal salvation or blessing from God.
Grace means that God saved us and blessed us despite ourselves and not
according to anything that we do but rather saved us and blessed us because of the
merits of Christ and His work on the Cross. It excludes any human merit in
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 70
salvation and blessing (Eph. 2:8-9; Titus 3:5) and gives the Creator all the credit
and the creature none. By means of faith, we accept the grace of God, which is a
non-meritorious system of perception, which is in total accord with the grace of
God. Grace and faith are totally compatible with each other and inseparable (1
Tim. 1:14) and complement one another (Rom. 4:16; Eph. 2:8). Grace, faith and
salvation are all the gift of God and totally exclude all human works and ability
(Eph. 2:8-9).
Titus 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds, which we have done in
righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and
renewing by the Holy Spirit. (NASB95)
The unique Person of the Lord Jesus Christ and His finished work on the Cross-
is the source of grace (2 Cor. 8:9) and He is a gift from the Father (2 Cor. 9:15).
Jesus Christ was full of “grace and truth” (John 1:17) and the believer receives
the grace of God through Him (John 1:16). It is by the grace of God that Jesus
Christ died a substitutionary spiritual death for all mankind (Heb. 2:9). Therefore,
the throne in which Christ sits is a “throne of grace” (Heb. 4:16). The grace of
God has been extended to every member of the human race because of the act of
love and justice on the Cross. At the Cross, the Father imputed the sins of every
person in history-past, present and future to the impeccable humanity of Christ in
hypostatic union on the Cross and judged Him as a substitute for the entire human
race (Titus 2:11).
The message of God’s saving act in Christ is described as the “gospel of the
grace of God” (Acts 20:24), and the “word of His grace” (Acts 20:32; cf. 14:3).
By His grace, God justifies the undeserving and unworthy through faith in His Son
Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:24). Grace is an absolute and is no longer grace if we are
saved on the basis of human works (Rom. 11:6).
Ephesians 1:3-14 teaches that believers in the Lord Jesus Christ are the
recipients of three categories of grace: (1) “Antecedent” grace: The Father’s work
in eternity past. (2) “Living” grace: Our spiritual life and its accompanying
invisible assets. (3) “Eschatological” grace: Resurrection bodies and our eternal
inheritance.
Therefore, since God has dealt graciously with the believer, the believer is in
turn commanded to be gracious with all members of the human race, both believers
and unbelievers (Eph. 4:32; Col. 3:13; 4:6; 1 Thess. 3:12).
A Christian is someone who is a “partaker” of the grace of God (Phil. 1:7) and
he is to live by the same principle of grace after salvation (Col. 2:6; Rom. 6:4).
Grace is the Christian’s sphere of existence (Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; Col. 1:2). The
believer who rejects this principle is said to have “fallen from grace,” (Gal. 5:1-
5). God in His grace and love disciplines the believer in order to get the believer
back in fellowship with Himself (Heb. 12:5-12). He also trains the believer through
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 71
undeserved suffering in order to achieve spiritual growth (2 Cor. 12:7-11). The
believer is commanded to “grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord Jesus
Christ” (2 Pet. 3:18). The believer experiences the grace of God while in
fellowship with God, which is accomplished by obedience to the Word of God.
God in His grace has given the believer the ability to learn and apply bible doctrine
through the ministry of God the Holy Spirit in order to achieve spiritual maturity
(Jn. 16:13-15; 1 Cor. 2:9-16).
God in His grace has provided the church with the spiritual gift of pastor-
teacher to communicate the mystery doctrine for the church age, which produces
spiritual growth (Eph. 3:1-5; 4:8-12, 16). The Christian life from beginning to end
is built upon God's policy of grace (2 Cor. 6:1-9; Rom. 5:2; John 1:16).
The grace of God has been manifested and revealed to the entire human race in
time through the following: (1) Unique Theanthropic Person of Jesus Christ (2)
Salvation work of Christ on the Cross (3) Word of God (4) Holy Spirit’s various
salvation and post-conversion ministries.
God the Father according to His grace policy has provided the unbeliever the
spiritual gift of evangelism and the royal ambassadorship of believers as the
vehicles that God the Holy Spirit employs to communicate the Gospel of Jesus
Christ for their salvation (Jn. 16:7-11; Eph. 4:11; 2 Cor. 5:17-21). God the Father
according to His grace policy has provided the believer with the spiritual gift of
pastor-teacher as the vehicle, which the Holy Spirit employs to communicate the
Word of God, which produces spiritual growth (Eph. 3:1-5; 4:8-12, 16). God the
Father according to His grace policy has provided the human race the Word of God
and the Spirit of God, which reveal His plan from eternity past (Word: 2 Pet. 1:20-
21; 2 Tim. 3:15-16; Spirit: Jn. 16:13-15; 1 Cor. 2:9-16).
In relation to the unbeliever, God the Father’s gracious provision of salvation
based upon faith in the merits of the Person and Work of Christ on the Cross-is
revealed by the Holy Spirit through the communication of the Gospel. In relation
to the believer, the Holy Spirit through the communication of the Word of God
reveals all the benefits of God the Father’s gracious provision for their salvation.
The Spirit of God through the communication of the Word of God reveals all
that the Father has graciously done and provided for the believer to do His will.
Therefore, we learn about the grace of God by listening to the Spirit’s voice, which
is heard through the communication of the Word of God (Colossians 1:3-6).
The Word of God informs the believer of all that God the Father has provided
for the believer through Person, Work and Life of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Holy
Spirit reveals the will of the Father through the communication of the Word of God
(Acts 21:11; 28:25; 1 Cor. 12:3; 1 Tim. 4:1; Heb. 3:7; Rev. 2:7, 11, 17; 3:6, 13,
22).

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 72

 The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ is not only His impeccable unique Person
and Work on the Cross but also it is the gift of His Words, His thoughts as
communicated to the believer by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 2:16). The Spirit does not
operate independently from the Word of God when He is actively working on
behalf of the believer (John 16:13-15). God the Holy Spirit in common grace
makes the Gospel message understandable to the unbeliever (John 16:7-11; 1 Cor.
2:10-15). God in His grace has to seek after spiritually dead human beings who
have no ability to seek Him (Rom. 3:11; 5:6-11; Eph. 2:1-5).
In the Greek New Testament, the term charis is used in the expression “grace
and peace” that appears in the introduction to his epistles (Phil. 1:2; Rom. 1:7).
In Philippians 1:2 and Romans 1:7, charis, “grace” refers to the revelation of
the blessings and benefits given to the believer at the moment of salvation, and
which blessings and benefits are imparted by the Holy Spirit through the
communication of the Word of God, which is the mind of Christ.
These blessings and benefits would include the revelation of the following: (1)
character of God and the Lord Jesus Christ; (2) blessings effected by the work of
the Trinity; (3) will of the Father; (4) provisions to perform the Father’s will, (5)
rewards for executing the Father’s will.
The impartation of these blessings to the believer pivots off his obedience to the
will of the Father. Both the believer and the unbeliever “learn” of the grace of God
(i.e. His unmerited favor) by “listening” to the voice of the Spirit, which is heard
through the communication of the Word of God.
The unbeliever receives the grace of God at the moment of salvation by obeying
the voice of the Spirit, which is heard by the unbeliever through the
communication of the Gospel for salvation by an evangelist or a believer operating
under his royal ambassadorship.
The believer receives the grace of God by obeying the voice of the Spirit who
speaks to the believer regarding the will of the Father through the communication
of the Word of God by the believer’s divinely ordained pastor-teacher, or fellow-
believer. The Holy Spirit reveals the Word of God to the believer making it
understandable to the believer since the Word of God is spiritual phenomena (Jn.
16:13-15; 1 Cor. 2:10-16).
The human race would have no knowledge of who and what God is, what He
has graciously done for the human race through the death, resurrection, ascension
and session of Jesus Christ if it were not for the Spirit of God. He inspired the
Scriptures, which reveals these things and who speaks to humanity through the
communication of the Word of God. Nor would the human race know the extent to
which and manner in which God has loved the entire human race if it were not for
the Spirit of God inspiring the Scripture which reveals these things and who speaks
to humanity through the communication of the Word of God.
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 73
 Believers would not know the deliverance that they can experience in time from
Satan, his cosmic system and the old sin nature if it were not for the Spirit
revealing through the communication of the Word of God the will of the Father
and what the Father did on their behalf through Christ’s death and resurrection,
ascension and session. They would know nothing of the fantastic future that the
believer has if it were not for the Spirit revealing it to the believer through the
communication of the Word of God (1 Cor. 2). The believer could not experience
fellowship with God if it were not for the Spirit and the Word.
The believer is able to experience a relationship with His Master, the Lord Jesus
Christ by obeying the Spirit’s voice, which is heard through the communication of
the Word of God. The believer experiences the blessings of having the character of
Christ reproduced in their lives by obeying the Spirit’s revelation of the Father’s
will, which is accomplished through the communication of the Word of God.
Obedience to the Father’s will as it is revealed by the Holy Spirit through the
communication of the Word of God in turn enables the Holy Spirit to reproduce
the life and character of Christ in the believer, which is the Father’s will for the
believer from eternity past.
God the Father is the author of the salvation plan of God for sinful mankind that
is based upon His grace policy and is executed by God the Son and revealed by the
Holy Spirit.
The attributes of each member of the Trinity are involved in grace in that the
grace of God is expressed through the harmonious function of all God’s divine
attributes in relation to both men and angels.
God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit are co-equal, co-infinite
and co-eternal and all with the same divine essence. God is not only a unity of
three Persons, all with same divine essence but also the essence of God is a unity
of invisible attributes, never working independently of each other. If they did work
independently of each other, this would corrupt the integrity of the divine essence.
Each of the divine attributes has a role to play in man’s salvation. Grace
involves the attributes of each member of the Trinity providing in imparting
unmerited blessings to the believer at the moment of salvation without
compromising the divine integrity. They are also involved in providing the
unbeliever the opportunity to receive these unmerited blessings by exposing them
to the Gospel of grace.
Grace is God giving of Himself (His holiness) in order to benefit all mankind.
Grace is the sum total of unmerited benefits, both temporal and spiritual, imparted
to the sinner through the harmonious function of the sum total of divine attributes
of each member of the Trinity as a result of the sinner making the non-meritorious
decision to trust in the Person and Work of Christ on the Cross. This is why John

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 74

writes the following: John 1:16, For of His fullness we have all received, and
grace upon grace. (NASB95)
God’s love is “merciful” meaning that God is compassionate towards His
enemies and pardons them (Eph. 2:1-7). Ephesians 2:1-7 teaches us that God’s
attribute of love causes Him to be “merciful” meaning that God is compassionate
towards His enemies and pardons them when they believe in Jesus Christ. Mercy is
God acting upon His policy of grace and withholding judgment. The mercy of God
is a manifestation of Who God is and is thus helps to compose His glory (Ex. 34:7;
Ps. 86:15; 119:156; 145:8; James 5:11). David acknowledged and expressed in his
song that God had been merciful to him (Ps. 30:1-3; Ps. 86:15; 103:1-14). The
Lord Jesus Christ perfectly manifested the mercy and compassion of God since He
is the love of God incarnate who manifested perfectly the character and nature of
God, and thus has explained the love of God (cf. Jn. 1:18).
The mercy of God as an expression of the love of God was manifested perfectly
to the entire human race through the Father’s sacrifice of His Son at the cross of
Calvary and the Son’s willingness to be that sacrifice. The Lord Jesus Christ
revealed the love of God through His mercy and compassion towards members of
the human race during His First Advent (Mt. 9:27, 36; 14:14; 15:22, 32; 17:15;
20:30-31, 34; 23:37; Mk. 1:41; 5:19; 6:34; 8:2; 10:47-48; Lk. 7:13; 10:33; 15:20;
17:13; 18:38-39; Lk. 7:13; Jn. 11:35). The mercy of God is related to the believer’s
salvation since God saved us on the basis of His mercy and not on the basis of
human merit or actions (Tit. 3:5). God has been merciful to all believers in that He
sent His Son to the cross while we were yet sinners (Romans 5:6-8).
In Luke 6:35-36, the Lord taught His disciples to imitate the Father in being
compassionate towards their enemies. Mercy and compassion are chief tenants of
the royal family honor code (Matthew 5:7; Jn. 15:9-13; Rm. 12:8; 12:1; 12:9-16;
15:1-2; Ga. 6:2; Eph. 4:30-32; Col. 3:12-14; Jam. 2:8; 1 Jn. 4:16-18; Jude 22).
Another critical doctrine which is alluded to in the book of Haggai is that of the
remnant which speaks of a remainder of righteous people of God who survive
judgment or catastrophe. The book of Haggai is addressed to the remnant of Jews
who had returned from exile after seventy years in Babylon.
One of the great doctrines contained in the Bible which has received a great
detail of attention in recent decades in the church is that of “the remnant of Israel.”
It is very important for the church age believer to understand this doctrine since it
first and foremost reveals the faithfulness of God in fulfilling His promises to the
Jews. It is important because it will protect the church age believer taking Old
Testament promises given directly to the Jews and applying them to the church.
Thus, it will protect the church age believer from the false doctrine that the church
is the “new” Israel and has replaced Israel in God’s program for the ages.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 75

 What is the doctrine of the remnant of Israel? It asserts that within the Jewish
nation, God will always set aside a certain amount of Jews who will believe in Him
in every dispensation and in every generation of human history. It is based upon
the unconditional promises contained in the Abrahamic, Palestinian, Davidic and
New covenants. All of which were given directly to the nation of Israel and not the
church.
A member of the remnant must meet two requirements. First, they must be
Jewish meaning that biologically or racially, they are descendants of Abraham,
Isaac and Jacob whose name was changed to “Israel” by God. It is not enough to
be a descendant of Abraham because two other branches of Arabs descended from
this man and not just the Jews. One branch of Arabs came from Abraham through
Hagar and the other came from Abraham through Keturah who was Abraham’s
wife after the death of Sarah. The second requirement which must be met is that of
trusting in the Lord. During the dispensation of Israel under the Mosaic Law, in
order to become a member of the remnant of Israel, a biological or racial
descendant of Jacob must place their trust in the God of Israel who the New
Testament identifies as being the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. During the First
Advent of Jesus Christ, a biological or racial descendant of Jacob must trust in
Jesus Christ as their Savior. This holds true during the dispensations of the church,
the seventieth week of Daniel and the millennial reign of Christ.
Fruchtenbaum writes “The doctrine of the remnant means that, within the
Jewish nation as a whole, there are always some who believe and all those who
believe among Israel comprise the Remnant of Israel. The remnant at any point of
history may be large or small but there is never a time when it is non-existent. Only
believers comprise the remnant, but not all believers are part of the remnant for the
remnant is a Jewish remnant and is, therefore, comprised of Jewish believers.
Furthermore, the remnant is always part of the nation as a whole and not detached
from the nation as a separate entity. The remnant is distinct, but distinct within the
nation.”151
During the dispensation of Israel, there was a certain number of Jews within the
nation of Israel who trusted in the God of Israel. God had also set aside a certain
number of Jews within the nation of Israel who trusted in His Son Jesus Christ as
Savior during the First Advent of Christ. Also, often overlooked and not
understood by even many dispensationalists, there is a certain number of Jews
during the church age who have become a part of the remnant of Israel through
faith in Jesus Christ. Consequently, they not only are a part of the remnant of Israel
but also they are members of the church as well. Therefore, they are a unique
group of people in history. During the seventieth week of Daniel, there will be a
believing remnant in Israel who will trust in Jesus Christ as their Savior. The
151
Fruchtenbaum, A. G. (1994). Israelology: the missing link in systematic theology (Rev. ed., p. 601). Tustin, CA: Ariel Ministries.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 76

Scriptures also teach that during the millennial reign of Jesus Christ, there will be a
believing remnant in Israel who will enjoy the blessings of this greatest time in
human history.
In the Old Testament, in relation to the nation of Israel, a “remnant” referred to
a small percentage of the population of the nation of Israel who survived divine
judgment in the form of the Assyrian and Babylonian invasions and deportations.
The concept has its roots in Deuteronomy 4:27-31; 28:62-68; 30:1-10. In these
passages, Moses warns Israel that they would be dispersed throughout the nations
for their disobedience but would be brought back to the land based upon God’s
grace and covenantal faithfulness. The prophets subsequent to Moses continued
this doctrine when teaching the nation of Israel during the time each lived.
The Septuagint uses the noun leimma of a remnant in Israel during the days of
King Hezekiah when Sennacherib invaded Israel and threatened to destroy
Jerusalem (2 Kings 18:13-2 Kings 19:37). The prophet Jeremiah uses the word
often of the remnant in his day (Jeremiah 40:11, 15; 41:10, 16; 42:2, 15, 19; 43:5;
44:7, 12, 14, 28; 44:28; 47:4, 5; 50:20). In Jeremiah 42:2 and 50:20 the remnant
refers to those Israelites returning from the Babylonian captivity. Jeremiah uses the
remnant of those Israelites who will experience the millennial reign of Christ
(Jeremiah 23:3; 31:7).
Zechariah also speaks of a remnant of Israelites during the millennial reign of
Christ (Zechariah 8:6, 11, 12). The prophet Micah also speaks of a future remnant
of Israelites during the millennium (Micah 2:12; 4:7; 5:7-8; 7:18) and so does
Zephaniah (2:7, 9, 3:13).
The remnant doctrine appears in the writings of Isaiah (Isaiah 10:20-22; 11:11,
16; 15:9; 16:14; 17:3; 28:5; 37:4, 31, 32; 46:3). It is used in Nehemiah (1:3) and in
the writings of Ezra of the returning Israelites from Babylon (Ezra 9:8, 13, 14, 15).
Haggai speaks of this remnant that returned from Babylon (1:12, 14; 2:2).
There are only three major passages in the New Testament which refer to the
doctrine of the remnant of Israel, namely Romans 9-11 and Revelation 7 and 14.
Matthew 3:7-10 and Luke 3:7-9 allude to this doctrine.
The book of Haggai closes with a Messianic prophecy and a proclamation to
restore the Davidic throne in fulfillment of the Davidic covenant.
Haggai 2:23 On that day,’ says the LORD who rules over all, ‘I will take
you, Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel, my servant,’ says the LORD, ‘and I will make
you like a signet ring, for I have chosen you,’ says the LORD who rules over
all.” (NET)
F.D. Lindsay writes “Three facts are prominent in this verse: (a) the LORD will
fulfill this prophecy on the future day of Gentile judgment (cf. vv. 21–22); (b) the
Lord will make Zerubbabel … like My signet ring; and (c) the LORD had
chosen Zerubbabel as the channel of the Davidic line and therefore representative
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 77
or typical of the Messiah. The title My servant frequently marked out the Davidic
king (cf. the “Servant songs” in Isa. [42:1–9; 49:1–13; 50:4–11; 52:13–53:12] and
also cf. 2 Sam. 3:18; 1 Kings 11:34; Ezek. 34:23–24; 37:24–25). Haggai’s
contemporary, Zechariah, used the messianic title ‘Branch’ to refer to Zerubbabel
(Zech. 3:8; 6:12; cf. Isa. 11:1; Jer. 23:5–6; 33:14–16). The significance of
comparing Zerubbabel to a ‘signet ring’ (a seal of royal authority or personal
ownership) is clarified by the imagery in Jeremiah 22:24–25. God said that if
Jehoiachin (Zerubbabel’s grandfather) were His signet ring, He would pull him off
His hand and give him over to Nebuchadnezzar. Possibly Haggai was saying that
in Zerubbabel God was reversing the curse pronounced on Jehoiachin. At any rate,
Zerubbabel’s place in the line of messianic descent (Matt. 1:12) confirmed his
representative role in typifying the Messiah. Since the words “on that day” point to
a yet-future fulfillment in the Messianic Age, it is wrong to suggest that
Zerubbabel would actually rule as the anointed one on the Davidic throne in
Haggai’s day. This was not intended any more than the crowning of Joshua the
high priest (Zech. 3:1–10) indicated he would have political rule over Israel. The
crowning of Joshua was clearly symbolic of things yet to be fulfilled by the
Messiah (Zech. 6:9–15). Joshua was portrayed in Zechariah’s vision in his official
capacity as high priest rather than in his own person. Similarly, Zerubbabel was
owned as the Lord’s ‘signet ring’ in his representative position as the son of David,
not for personal fulfillment in his own lifetime but for messianic fulfillment in the
kingdom of the final Son of David (cf. Luke 1:32–33). An alternate interpretation
sees Zerubbabel exercising delegated authority with David during the future
millennial reign of Christ.”152
The “Davidic” covenant deals with the dynasty that will rule the nation of Israel
as indicated in 2 Samuel 7:16 where God promised David that a descendant of his
would sit on his throne forever.
As in the case of the Abrahamic covenant, this covenant with David is restated
and reconfirmed elsewhere in Scripture (cf. Isa. 9:6-7; Jer. 23:5-6; 30:8-9; 33:14-
17, 20-21; Ezek. 37:24-25; Dan. 7:13-14; Hos. 3:4-5; Amos 9:11; Zech. 14:4, 9).
The Davidic covenant contains four promises: (1) A Davidic House: Posterity
of David will never be destroyed. (2) A Davidic Throne: Kingdom of David shall
never be destroyed. (3) A Davidic Kingdom: David’s Son (Christ) will have an
earthly sphere of rule. (4) It Shall Be Unending. The “sign” of the Davidic
Covenant is a Son (Lord Jesus Christ).
Provisions of the Davidic covenant: (1) David is to have a child, yet to be born,
who will succeed him and establish his kingdom (2) This son (Solomon), instead
of David, will build the temple. (3) The throne of his kingdom will be established
152
Lindsey, F. D. (1985). Haggai. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures
(Vol. 1, p. 1544). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 78

forever. (4) The throne will not be taken away from him (Solomon) even though
his sins justify God’s discipline. (5) David’s house, throne and kingdom will be
established forever.
The essential features of the Davidic covenant are found in three words in 2
Samuel 7:16: (1) House (physical descendants): A line stemming from David
would continue indefinitely and would be the divinely recognized royal line. (2)
Kingdom (political body): the political body that David would rule and over which
David’s descendants would successively reign. (3) Throne (right to rule): refers to
the authority as king vested in him.
Just as important as these three terms is the word “forever,” which refers to any
time during which the descendants of Abraham would exist. Even though there
might be temporary interruptions in the exercise of royal authority because of
divine discipline, the authority would never transfer to another line.
One of the royal titles that the Lord Jesus Christ possesses is that of the “Son of
David,” which denotes His rulership over the nation of Israel (Matt. 1:1; 20:30;
Mark 10:47-48; Luke 1:32; 2 Tim. 2:8; Rev. 3:7; 5:5; 22:16).
The prophetic implications of the Davidic covenant: (1) Israel must be
preserved as a nation. (2) Israel must have a national existence and be brought back
into the land of her inheritance. (3) David’s descendant, the Lord Jesus Christ,
must return to the earth, bodily and literally, in order to reign over David’s
covenanted kingdom. (4) A literal earthly kingdom must exist over which the
returned Messiah will reign. (5) This kingdom must become an eternal kingdom.
The Davidic Covenant contains four promises: (1) A Davidic House: Posterity
of David will never be destroyed. (2) A Davidic Throne: Kingdom of David shall
never be destroyed. (3) A Davidic Kingdom: David’s Son (Christ) will have an
earthly sphere of rule. (4) It Shall Be Unending. The “sign” of the Davidic
Covenant is a Son (Lord Jesus Christ).
The Bible anticipates a future literal fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant. The
Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of David, will literally fulfill this covenant during His
millennial reign.
J. A. Motyer writes “Haggai’s book begins and ends with references to
Zerubbabel (1:1; 2:20). Though Haggai began his ministry at a public festival, he
did not look to the assembled people but to the Davidic Zerubbabel (1 Chron. 3:1,
19) for the impetus to build the house, and he returns to him with the promise that
in Zerubbabel the Lord will rebuild the house of David. The parallel with David is
striking, for David wanted to build the Lord’s house, and in response the Lord
vowed to build the king’s house. This recapitulation of 2 Samuel 7:1–11 shows
that the messianic element is not an afterthought but the framing context of the
whole message and that it was his messianic urgency that made Haggai the prophet

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 79

who encouraged the builders. To see this more fully we must turn to the subject for
which he is most famous.”153
Ricard Tayler writes “Haggai’s final sermon shifts attention from the rebuilding
of the temple to future prospects for a renewed Davidic rule. Haggai 2:20–23 in
effect reverses the curse pronounced upon Jehoiachin in Jer 22:24 and promises
that Zerubbabel will be as it were a signet ring on the Lord’s hand. The imagery
used in Hag 2:20–23 to describe Zerubbabel is suggestive of his being a divinely
appointed representative who is thereby invested with royal authority. The scene is
described in language that is ultimately eschatological in intent, 154 though at the
same time the language is reminiscent of similar language used in the Torah to
describe the Lord’s mighty acts at the time of the exodus. It appears that
Zerubbabel is here a representative figure, much as David is elsewhere in the
Hebrew Bible. The passage thus promises that a Davidide will at some future point
again rule as the Lord’s chosen agent. That this promise did not find fulfillment in
Zerubbabel himself was not taken by the early readers of the book to mean that the
promise had completely failed, as some modern readers have concluded. The
ancient Jewish community entertained the hope for a full but future realization of
the promise.155 Although Davidic rule had been forfeited throughout the period of
the exile as a consequence of national sin, the prophet held out prospects for a
glorious reversal of fortunes. The Book of Haggai thus ends with an expression of
divine faithfulness to earlier promises made with regard to the continuation of
Davidic rule through a future heir to the throne.156”157

Intertextuality in Haggai

Like his fellow prophets, Haggai makes use of the writing of the prophets of
Israel who came before him. At times, Haggai appears to be echoing earlier
153
Motyer, J. A. (2009). Haggai. In T. E. McComiskey (Ed.), The Minor Prophets: An Exegetical and Expository Commentary (p. 964). Grand
Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.
154
I cannot agree with S. Mowinckel’s assessment that “the message of Haggai and Zechariah has nothing to do with eschatology. What they are
waiting for is a complete historical revolution in the Near East, attributed, of course, to the guidance of Yahweh and to the intervention of His
miraculous power, but developing within the course of empirical history and working through normal human means. ‘By His spirit’ Yahweh will
guide events so that the world powers destroy each other in the chaos which has arisen all over the east as a result of the death of Cambyses; and
Israel alone will remain unscathed and will reap the benefit. This may be described as a fantastic and unrealistic expectation, but that does not
make it eschatology” (He That Cometh [New York: Abingdon, n.d.], 121). To restrict Haggai’s message entirely to its sixth-century context and
to disallow any anticipation of more distant messianic hope does not do justice to certain portions of the book. For an approach that stresses the
eschatological elements found in Haggai, see H. F. van Rooy, “Eschatology and Audience: The Eschatology of Haggai,” OTE 1 (1988): 49–63; J.
A. Kessler, “The Shaking of the Nations: An Eschatological View,” JETS 30 (1987): 159–66.
155
In more recent Jewish thought there has occasionally been an attempt to explain almost all of Haggai, and Zechariah as well, in a futuristic
way. See A. Gross, “R. Abraham Saba’s Abbreviated Messianic Commentary on Haggai and Zechariah,” in Studies in Medieval Jewish History
and Literature, Harvard Judaic Monographs 2 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1984), 389–401.
156
J. E. Tollington has argued, to the contrary, that the prologue and epilogue of the Book of Judges give evidence for thinking that that book
was edited in the postexilic period in a way intended to lend support to Haggai’s prophecies of a dynastic monarchy (“The Book of Judges: The
Result of Post-Exilic Exegesis?” in Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel: Papers Read at the Tenth Joint Meeting of the Society for Old Testament
Study and Het Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap in Nederland en Belgie, Held at Oxford, 1997 , Oudtestamentische Studiën 40 [Leiden: Brill,
1998], 186–96).
157
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 82–83). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 80

traditions in a general way without actually quoting any specific biblical passage.
On the other hand, there are times when Haggai’s words make clear that he has in
mind a specific biblical passage, even though he does not directly quote the
passage. On other occasions, the similarity in language which is present in the
book of Haggai, make clear that he has a specific passage of Scripture in mind and
is more directly quoted it or it is being alluded to in Haggai. When this takes place,
it is assumed that the reader of Haggai would be familiar not only with the citation
itself, but also would be familiar with its context in the original setting.
Richard Taylor writes “Old Testament writers neither thought nor wrote in a
way that was detached from or inattentive to those sacred writings that the Lord
had previously given to Israel. From a literary standpoint they were not islands to
themselves. The natural reflex of their familiarity with earlier sacred writings was
that they tended to call to mind images and/or phraseology from that literature in
order to punctuate their own messages. In that sense they were somewhat like the
modern preacher whose vocabulary and rhetoric may at times, even without
conscious intention, reflect a deep familiarity with the Bible. 158 Like other
prophetic authors Haggai too makes use of earlier sacred writings, indicating both
his familiarity with that material and his readiness to use it to enhance his own
writing and to advance his own argument.159”160
Mignon Jacobs writes “The connections between the book of Haggai and other
Old Testament books are noteworthy. The elements that the book of Haggai shares
with other biblical books range from vocabulary (words, phrases) to concepts
signaled by but not limited to its vocabulary, to theologies and allusions.”161
The book of Haggai makes use of the book of Deuteronomy and in particular
Deuteronomy 28. In Haggai 1:6-11, the prophet Haggai describes the postexilic
community as impoverished in that they were plagued by crop failure which
resulted in an economic depression. The language he uses to present this
description is reminiscent of Deuteronomy chapter 28:18-51. What Haggai does in
Haggai 1:6-11is interpret the problems of the postexilic community as being based
upon the blessing and cursing patterns articulated in Deuteronomy 28. By doing
this, Haggai was reminding this postexilic community of their covenantal
responsibilities to the Lord. He is in effect presenting the implications of his appeal
158
For a helpful discussion of many of the methodological issues involved in locating and evaluating instances of quotation in the prophetic
literature of the Hb. Bible, see the following recent work: R. L. Schultz, The Search for Quotation: Verbal Parallels in the Prophets, JSOTSup
180 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999). See also the following helpful collection of essays dealing with various aspects of
intertextuality: J. C. de Moor, ed., Intertextuality in Ugarit and Israel: Papers Read at the Tenth Joint Meeting of the Society for Old Testament
Study and Het Oudtestamentisch Werkgezelschap in Nederland en Belgie, Held at Oxford, 1997 , Oudtestamentische Studiën 40 (Leiden: Brill,
1998).
159
For a helpful discussion of intertextuality in the Minor Prophets see J. D. Nogalski, “Intertextuality and the Twelve,” in Forming Prophetic
Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D. W. Watts, JSOTSup 235 (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), 102–24.
160
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 83–84). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.
161
Jacobs, M. R. (2017). The Books of Haggai and Malachi. (E. J. Young, R. K. Harrison, & R. L. Hubbard Jr., Eds.) (p. 20). Grand Rapids, MI:
William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 81

to Deuteronomy 28, which are both positive and negative. They are positive
because he is acknowledging that this postexilic community possesses a covenantal
relationship with the Lord. They are negative in the sense this community was
being cursed by the Lord for being negligent with regards to their covenantal
responsibilities to the Lord. It would not go unnoticed by the remnant of Judah that
the book of Haggai is echoing Deuteronomy 28 and reminding them that their
impoverishment as a nation is based upon the blessing and cursing
pronouncements in Deuteronomy 28.
As we noted Haggai and Zechariah were contemporaries because together they
helped Zerubbabel restart the project and work to rebuild the temple which began
again in 520 B.C. (Ezra 5:1; Hag. 1:1; Zech. 1:1; Ezra 5-6). Now, unlike Haggai’s
used of Deuteronomy 28, we see that the prophet Zechariah makes use of Haggai.
The former in Zechariah 8:12 prophesies that “The ground will produce its crops,
and the heavens will drop their dew.” In Haggai 1:10, Haggai tells Zerubbabel and
Joshua the high priest and the postexilic community that “the heavens have
withheld their dew and the earth its crops” because they were negligent with
regards to their covenantal responsibilities to the Lord.
Richard Taylor writes “Two differences between the Haggai text and the
Zechariah text stand out. First, the order of the two statements is reversed in
Zechariah, where mention of the heavens follows mention of the ground. Second,
the negative effects of Haggai’s statement are transformed into positive effects in
Zechariah. It is possible that the order of the two statements has been reversed in
Zechariah so as to call attention to the reversal of conditions that the Lord had
brought about for his people by the time of Zechariah’s message. Or perhaps this is
just one more example of a general tendency in Zechariah to establish verbal
linkage with Haggai, in this case with the added effect of ‘heavens’ in Hag 1:10
and Zech 8:12 creating a chiastic structure that links the two sections together
literarily.162 This is not the only example of such an inverted quotation in Old
Testament literature; it is a device that crops up a number of times elsewhere.163”164
Another fascinating use of Old Testament Scripture by Haggai is that of his
alluding to Joshua 1:6-9.
Joshua 1:6 Be strong and brave! You must lead these people in the
conquest of this land that I solemnly promised their ancestors I would hand
over to them. 1:7 Make sure you are very strong and brave! Carefully obey all
the law my servant Moses charged you to keep! Do not swerve from it to the
right or to the left, so that you may be successful in all you do. 1:8 This law
162
See Meyers and Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1–8, 423.
163
The expression “inverted quotation” is P. C. Beentjes’. His discussion of this phenomenon in the Hb. Bible is helpful; see “Discovering a
New Path of Intertextuality: Inverted Quotations and Their Dynamics,” in Literary Structure and Rhetorical Strategies in the Hebrew Bible
(Assen: Van Gorcum, 1996), 31–50.
164
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 85–86). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 82

scroll must not leave your lips! You must memorize it day and night so you
can carefully obey all that is written in it. Then you will prosper and be
successful. 1:9 I repeat, be strong and brave! Don’t be afraid and don’t panic,
for I, the Lord your God, am with you in all you do.” (NET)
Notice that the Lord commands Joshua three times in the wake of Moses’ death
just prior to leading the nation of Israel into the land of promise, to be strong and
courageous. With these commands, the Lord promises His presence with Joshua as
fulfills the task of leading the nation in dispossessing the inhabitants of that land.
In Haggai 2:4-5, the prophet Haggai adopts the language found in Joshua 1:6-9.
Haggai 2:4 Yet now be strong, O Zerubbabel, declares the LORD. Be
strong, O Joshua, son of Jehozadak, the high priest. Be strong, all you people
of the land, declares the LORD. Work, for I am with you, declares the LORD of
hosts, 5 according to the covenant that I made with you when you came out of
Egypt. My Spirit remains in your midst. Fear not. (ESV)
Notice Haggai employs the imperative form of the verb ḥăzaq, “be strong”
which is repeated three times in verse 4. This same form of this verb appears in
Joshua 1:6, 7 and 9. Furthermore, not only does Haggai used this same verb form
three times but he also in conjunction with this command employs the promise of
the divine presence to energize the work of the people. In fact, Haggai 2:5 alludes
to the exodus in order to provide assurance for the postexilic community that the
Lord would be faithful to them as He was to their predecessors.
Also, Haggai 2:6-7, and 21 allude to Joel 4:16 in that the language of the former
is reminiscent of the latter.
Joel 3:16 The Lord roars from Zion; from Jerusalem his voice bellows out.
The heavens and the earth shake. But the Lord is a refuge for his people; he is
a stronghold for the citizens of Israel. (NET)
Haggai 2:6 Moreover, the Lord who rules over all says: ‘In just a little
while I will once again shake the sky and the earth, the sea and the dry
ground. 2:7 I will also shake up all the nations, and they will offer their
treasures; then I will fill this temple with glory,’ says the Lord who rules over
all. (NET)
Haggai 2:21 Tell Zerubbabel governor of Judah: ‘I am ready to shake the
sky and the earth. (NET)
Notice that both passages speak of the Lord shaking the heavens and the earth
in the future using identical yet common vocabulary but striking nonetheless.
Haggai 2:17 echoes Amos 4:9.
Amos 4:9 “I destroyed your crops with blight and disease. Locusts kept
devouring your orchards, vineyards, fig trees, and olive trees. Still you did not
come back to me.” The LORD is speaking! (NET)

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 83

 Haggai 2:17 I struck all the products of your labor with blight, disease, and
hail, and yet you brought nothing to me,’ says the LORD. (NET)
Richard Taylor writes “The verbal correspondences between the two passages
are obvious, even in the English text.165 In the Hebrew text the first four words of
Hag 2:17 exactly match the first four words of Amos 4:9. The precise
correspondence in wording has led Elliger to suggest that the words in Haggai may
be a later addition,166 but this is an unnecessary conjecture. It is not only later
editors of biblical material who quoted earlier biblical writers; biblical writers
themselves also engaged in this practice. Although elsewhere it is often difficult to
determine priority in cases like these, here there can be no question of who is
quoting whom. Amos wrote in the eighth century, whereas Haggai wrote in the late
sixth century. It is therefore Haggai who borrows the language of Amos.
Furthermore, the language found in both prophets is ultimately drawn from the
curses of Deut 28:22, where blight and mildew are listed among the judgments that
the Lord will send upon his people Israel if they choose to disobey the covenant
stipulations that he gave to them.”167
Haggai 2:22 draws on Exodus 15:1.
Exodus 15:1 Then Moses and the Israelites sang this song to the LORD. They
said, “I will sing to the LORD, for he has triumphed gloriously, the horse and
its rider he has thrown into the sea.” (NET)
Haggai 2:22 I will overthrow royal thrones and shatter the might of earthly
kingdoms. I will overthrow chariots and those who ride them, and horses and
their riders will fall as people kill one another. (NET)
Haggai draws on the opening lines of the song of Moses. By drawing on this
passage in Exodus, the prophet Haggai is bringing out the implication of the Lord
defeating Pharaoh and his Egyptian army at the Red Sea in that the Lord will in the
future deliver His people Israel from Gentile superpowers. At His Second Advent,
the Lord Jesus Christ will deliver the remnant of Israel from Satan, Antichrist and
the tribulational armies to conclude the seventieth week of Daniel. This
deliverance will be likened to Israel’s deliverance from Pharaoh’s Egypt.
Haggai 2:23 makes use of Jeremiah 22:24. The latter records the Lord telling
Jeconiah, the king of Judah that He will no longer the Lord’s representative of His
authority and that He would take that right away from him. Haggai 2:23 records
the Lord setting His seal of approval on Zerubbabel.
Richard Taylor writes “Haggai’s use of this text is remarkable for both its
continuities and its discontinuities with the passage from Jeremiah. The metaphor
165
The NIV’s rendering “yet you did not turn to me” in Hag 2:17 is problematic from a text-critical perspective. For that matter the MT is very
problematic here as well. For a brief treatment of the text-critical issues see the discussion of that verse in the commentary.
166
See note /a/ for Hag 2:17 in the critical apparatus of BHS.
167
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, p. 87). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 84

of the signet ring on the Lord’s hand to symbolize an Israelite leader is present in
Haggai as it is in Jeremiah. In fact, Haggai’s words are addressed to none other
than the grandson of Jehoiachin, namely Zerubbabel. But rather than repeating the
Lord’s curse upon this line, Haggai signifies instead divine pleasure in Zerubbabel,
promising in emphatic terms that ‘On that day,’ declares the LORD Almighty, ‘I
will take you, my servant Zerubbabel son of Shealtiel,’ declares the LORD, ‘and I
will make you like my signet ring, for I have chosen you,’ declares the LORD
Almighty.’ Thus in Haggai we find reversal of the curse expressed by Jeremiah. It
is inconceivable that Haggai recorded this promise to Zerubbabel without
intending the connection to Jer 22:24 to be obvious to all who were familiar with
earlier prophetic texts. Haggai 2:23 must be read in light of Jer 22:24.168”169

Interpretative Approach to Haggai

One must adhere to sound hermeneutical principles when interpreting the

prophecies contained in the book of Haggai. The rules and principles involved in
interpreting the Bible is called hermeneutics. The English word “hermeneutics”
comes from the Greek verb hermeneuo and the noun hermeneia. These words point
back to the wing-footed messenger god Hermes in Grecian mythology who was
responsible for transmuting what is beyond human understanding into a form that
human intelligence can grasp. He is said to have discovered language and writing
and was the god of literature and eloquence, among other things. He was the
messenger or interpreter of the gods, and particularly of his father Zeus. Thus, the
verb hermeneuo came to refer to bringing someone to an understanding of
something in his language (thus explanation) or in another language (thus
translation). Thus, interpretation involves making clear and intelligible something
that was unclear or unknown.
A compound form of this verb appears in Luke 24:27 with regards to the Lord
Jesus Christ interpreting or explaining the Scriptures concerning Himself to His
disciples.
Luke 24:27 Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He
explained (diahermeneuo) to them the things concerning Himself in all the
Scriptures. (NASB95)

168
Contrary to Y. Hoffman, I see no good reason to question the textual validity of Jer 22:24. Hoffman says: “It is inconceivable that Haggai,
meaning to encourage Zerubbabel, would use the metaphor of a signet which had already lost its meaning by Jeremiah’s prophecy. I therefore
assume that Haggai was the first to use the metaphor. A counter-prophecy was then ascribed to Jeremiah and inserted into the prophetic
anthology bearing his name, in order to nullify Haggai’s theopolitical message. Both these prophecies, then, reflect a political polemic in
Jerusalem in about 520 BCE. If this interpretation is correct, then Jer 22:24 is another example of the retrospective character of some of the
apparent theopolitical sayings in the Bible” (“Reflections on the Relationship between Theopolitics, Prophecy and Historiography,” in Politics
and Theopolitics in the Bible and Postbiblical Literature, JSOTSup 171 [Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1994], 99).
169
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, pp. 88–89). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 85

 Adhering to sound hermeneutical principles will result in sound exegesis, which
refers to the process of determining the meaning of a text of Scripture, the Word of
God. Exposition refers to the explaining, declaring, telling, or relating of objective
truth.
Exegesis precedes exposition (i.e. communicating the Word of God to the
congregation). Exposition aims to apply the text and its meaning to men and
women today, enabling them to answer the question: what message has this for us,
or for me, in the present situation? Exposition must be firmly based upon exegesis:
the meaning of the text for hearers today must be related to its meaning for the
hearers to whom it was first addressed.
When interpreting the prophecies in the book of Haggai as is the case with the
rest of Scripture, one must not allegorize but let the Biblical text speak for itself.
Those who allegorize are not letting the text speak for itself but are putting words
into God’s mouth. Haggai like the rest of the Scriptures must be interpreted in its
historical setting. One must compare Scripture with Scripture. Also, one must
interpret literally and grammatically and not allegorize. Proper interpretation
involves paying attention to the context of a particular verse. One must interpret a
passage by taking into account the immediate context as well as the context of the
book it appears in and the rest of Scripture. This leads to a pretribulational and
premillennial view.
The basic differences between the premillennial and amillennial and between
pretribulation and posttribulation views are hermeneutical. In other words, they are
the direct result of method one chooses to interpret Scripture. The basic difference
between an amillennialist and a premillennialist is the direct result of the method
one chooses to interpret Scripture. Those who allegorize and do not interpret the
Scripture literally and specifically prophetic portions of Scripture will not be
pretribulational or premillennial but will be posttribulationalists and
amillennialists. Therefore, the method one chooses to interpret the book of Haggai
as is the case with the rest of Scripture, must be based upon sound hermeneutical
principles. Unsound method of interpreting Scripture leads to error in interpretation
and practice and false doctrine.
The allegorical method involves interpreting a literary text which regards the
literal sense as the instrument for a secondary and more spiritual profound sense.
This method either ignores or denies the historical context. The emphasis with this
method is entirely upon the secondary sense with the result that the original words
of the text have little or no significance at all. Thus, this method does not interpret
Scripture but ignores the meaning of the original sense with the justification that
one is seeking a deeper, spiritual meaning. It is in error because it doesn’t interpret
Scripture but puts words into God’s mouth. It denies the authority of the Scripture.
Furthermore, this method does not provide any means at all to test the
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 86
interpretation. Thus, the allegorical method of interpreting Haggai or any portion
of Scripture takes away the authority of Scripture. It does not leave any basis upon
which interpretations may be tested.
The direct antithesis of the allegorical method is the literal method of
interpreting the Scripture. The literal method gives each word the same exact basic
meaning it would have in normal and customary usage whether in writing,
speaking or thinking. It is also called by some the grammatical-historical method,
which emphasizes the fact that the meaning of a text is to be determined by
carefully considering its grammar and syntax as well as its historical setting.
Ramm writes, “The customary, socially-acknowledged designation of a word is
the literal meaning of that word. The ‘literal’ meaning of a word is the basic,
customary, social designation of that word. The spiritual, or mystical meaning of a
word or expression is one that arises after the literal designation and is dependent
upon it for its existence. To interpret literally means nothing more or less than to
interpret in terms of normal, usual, designation. When the manuscript alters its
designation the interpreter immediately shifts his method of interpreting.”170
The literal method is the normal approach in all languages. Also, parables,
allegories, types and symbols depend upon the literal meaning of the terms. The
Bible makes sense when interpreted literally. Furthermore, many erroneously
contend that the literal method does not take into consideration figures of speech,
symbols, allegories and types. However, this in fact not the case. This method
removes the subjective and emphasizes the objective meaning that it keeps man’s
imaginations from imposing itself on the text and lets the text speak for itself.
Ramm writes, “That this method is the only one consonant with the nature of
inspiration. The plenary inspiration of the Bible teaches that the Holy Spirit guided
men into truth and away from error. In this process the Spirit of God used
language, and the units of language (as meaning, not as sound) are words and
thoughts. The thought is the thread that strings the words together. Therefore, our
very exegesis must commence with a study of words and grammar, the two
fundamentals of all meaningful speech.”171
Further in support of the literal method is that when the Old Testament is used
by the New Testament authors under the inspiration of the Spirit it is only used in a
literal sense. For example, the prophecies concerning the life, ministry, death and
resurrection of Christ were literally fulfilled two thousand years ago with the
person of Jesus of Nazareth. This tells us that the prophecies concerning His
Second Advent will also be fulfilled literally.

170
Protestant Biblical Interpretation, page 64; Boston: W.A. Wilde Company, 1950
171
Ibid., page 54ff.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 87

 The literal method bases itself in fact, which means that it seeks to establish
itself in objective data such as grammar, logic, etymology, history, geography,
archaeology, theology, etc.
All sound exegesis of a passage of Scripture must begin with the words of the
text itself. Secondly, the interpreter must pay attention to the context in which any
passage appears. Thirdly, one must interpret a passage of Scripture in its historical
setting.
In the book of Haggai, we must understand that Haggai lived in the sixth
century B.C. and was addressing the remnant of Judah which had returned from
seventy years of captivity in Babylon. Another important consideration when
interpreting Scripture is that the interpreter must understand the grammar and
syntax of a passage. Specifically, he must understand the grammar and syntax of
the original language of the passage. In Haggai, the interpreter is analyzing the
Hebrew text of the book. The interpreter must take into consideration figurative
language. He must have the presupposition that the word is literal unless there is
strong evidence for determining otherwise.
Now, the interpreter of the book of Haggai must be very careful since it
contains prophetic material and in particular the Messianic prophecy contained in
Haggai 2:23. First and foremost, the interpreter must interpret prophecy literally.
He must take into consideration and analyze a passage in relation to the words it
contains as well as its context, grammar, syntax and historical setting. When
interpreting this prophecy, the interpreter must determine the historical background
of the prophet and the prophecy. He must determine the full meaning and
significance of all the names, events, geographical references, references to
customs and culture. He is to determine if the passage is prophecy or didactic. If
the former, then is the verse presenting a prophecy that is fulfilled, unfulfilled or
conditional? The interpreter also must determine if the same theme or concept is
addressed in another passage of Scripture. Simultaneously, the interpreter must pay
attention to the context. He is to be aware of whether the prophecy is local or
temporal. Furthermore, prophecy must be interpreted in harmony with the rest of
God’s prophetic program, which is a principle presented by Peter in 2 Peter 1:20-
21.
Another important aspect of interpreting prophecy is understanding and being
aware that a passage might have a double reference. This means that in prophecy,
events often bear some relationship to one another and are in fact parts of one
program. In other words, certain events of the future are seen grouped together in
one defined area of vision even though they are at different distances. For example,
many times the major prophets issued prophecies concerning the Babylonian
captivity, the events of the day of the Lord, the return from Babylon, the world-

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 88

wide dispersion of Israel and their future return to the land and grouped them all
together seemingly indiscriminately.
Connected to this when interpreting prophecy, the interpreter must observe the
time relationships meaning that some events that are widely separated as to the
time of their fulfillment are sometimes treated within one prophecy. For example,
the prophecies concerning the First and Second Advents of Christ are spoken of
together in one pericope as though they were going to take place at the same time.
This phenomena is also seen with the second and third dispersions of the Jews,
which are viewed as taking place without interruption. So the prophet may view
widely separated events as continuous or future things as either past or present.
Another important aspect of interpreting prophecy is that of understanding and
being aware of the central theme of all prophecy, namely, the Lord Jesus Christ,
His person and work.
To summarize, one must interpret prophecy historically, which means that the
interpreter must know and understand the historical background of the prophet and
the prophecy. This will include understanding the full meaning and significance of
all proper names, events, geographical references, references to customs and
culture. Connected to this is that the interpreter must interpret grammatically
meaning that he must strictly observe the rules that govern grammatical
interpretation. He also must interpret according to the principle of double
reference, which we noted earlier. Finally, interpreting prophecy demands
consistency applying the literal-grammatical method. Failure to consistently apply
sound hermeneutical principles results in error in one’s conclusions and
interpretations, which results in false doctrine and ungodly conduct. Consistent
observance of these sound hermeneutical principles results in correct
interpretation, sound doctrine and godly conduct.
One of the results of applying these sound hermeneutical principles is that one
will see that the Scriptures make a distinction between Israel and the church. The
book of Haggai concerns itself with Israel and not the church. The essence of
dispensationalism is that it recognizes distinctions between the church and Israel,
which is the result of applying the literal-grammatical-historical method of
interpretation. Dispensationalism recognizes distinctions in God’s program in
history. The dispensationalist follows the principle of interpreting the Bible
literally, and does not allegorize away the Bible, thus he is consistent in his
interpretation. It recognizes that God’s message to man was not given in one single
act but was unfolded in a long series of successive acts and through the minds and
hands of many men of varying backgrounds.
When approaching the interpretation of prophecy including the prophetic
material in Haggai, one must view prophecy as emphasizing primarily the Messiah
and the establishment of His millennial kingdom on planet earth.
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 89
 Zuck writes “Scripture makes it clear that Jesus will return to establish His
reign on the earth. He is reigning now from heaven, but the earthly manifestation
of His reign when He comes in person is yet future. The Book of Psalms presents
Him as ‘the King of glory,’ who will enter the gates of Jerusalem (Ps. 24:7–10).
According to Isaiah 9:6–7 He is the Son on whose shoulders will rest the
government of the world and He will reign on David’s throne and over His
kingdom. As a righteous Branch of David He will serve as ‘a King who will reign
wisely and do what is just and right in the land’ (Jer. 23:5, italics added). Jesus,
born in Bethlehem, ‘will be Ruler over Israel’ (Micah 5:2), and ‘the Lord will rule
over them in Mount Zion’ (4:7). As Zechariah wrote, the Lord ‘will stand on the
Mount of Olives’ and the Lord ‘will come’ and ‘will be King over the whole earth’
(Zech. 14:4–5, 9). History is going somewhere; it is moving according to God’s
divine plan, which will culminate in the return of Christ, followed by His 1,000-
year reign on the earth, which in turn will be followed by the eternal state in the
new heaven and the new earth. Obviously it is incorrect to reduce the kingdom of
God to the Lord’s reign within an individual’s soul or to think of His kingdom as
only the individual believer’s immortality.”172
Furthermore, when approaching the interpretation of prophecy, the interpreter
must recognize the principle of “foreshortening” which means that the prophets
often envisioned the two advents of Christ as two mountain peaks, with a valley in
between. They could see the peaks but not the valleys.
So, from our perspective here in the church age, we can look back and see the
time gap between the First and Second Advents. So many times, the Old Testament
blends the two comings of Christ in one passage such as in Isaiah 61:1–2. This is
made clear when the Lord read from this chapter in the synagogue of Nazareth
(Luke 4:16–21) and stopped in the middle of verse 2 with the words “to proclaim
the year of the Lord’s favor.” He did not add the words “and the day of vengeance
of our God,” obviously a reference to the Lord’s return when He will take
vengeance on His enemies. Isaiah 9:6–7 is another example. The first part of verse
6 refers to Jesus’ birth, but the middle part of verse 6 along with verse 7 point to
His second advent by speaking of the government being on His shoulders and His
reigning on David’s throne.
Seeing events related to the two advents of Christ together, the Old Testament
prophets often did not understand how it would all unfold. This is why Peter wrote,
“The prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently
and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which
the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when He predicted the sufferings of
Christ and the glories that would follow” (1 Peter 1:10–11).
172
Campbell, D. K. (1991). Foreword. In C. Bubeck Sr. (Ed.), Basic Bible Interpretation: A Practical Guide to Discovering Biblical Truth (pp.
241–249). Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 90

 Another important guideline for interpreting prophecy is that of being aware of
the fact that sometimes the Scriptures include interpretations. This is seen in Daniel
chapter 2 and 7. In both chapters the prophecy is given and interpretation is given
as well. Also, when interpreting prophetic literature, one must compare parallel
passages. For example, Revelation 13 needs to be studied in correlation with
Daniel 9, and the closing verses of Joel 2 need to be studied in relation to
Revelation 19. The numerous passages on the Millennium in Isaiah 9; 24; Joel 2;
Zechariah 14; and Revelation 20:1–10 all need to be studied together.
The interpreter of prophecy must also look for prophecies that are already
fulfilled and those which are yet to be fulfilled. For example, a portion of the
closing verses of Joel 2 were fulfilled in any sense on the Day of Pentecost. The
final fulfillment of Joel 2:18–32 awaits the millennial reign of Christ. Since the
Bible is a divine book, we expect to see consistency in the Bible. This means, for
one thing, that since certain predictions have been fulfilled literally, we can expect
that unfilled prophecies will be carried out in the same way, literally.
Walvoord writes “The fact that so many prophecies have already been literally
fulfilled lends support for the expectation that prophecies yet to be fulfilled will
have the same literal fulfillment.”173

Author’s Outline

I. First Message to the Remnant of Israel (1:1-11).

A. Introduction to the Message (1:1)
(1) Date of the Message (1:1a).
(2) Origin of the Message (1:1b).
(3) Recipients of the Message (1:1c).
B. The Lord’s Accusation Against the Remnant of Israel (1:2-6).
C. The Lord’s Exhortation to Rebuild the Temple (1:7-8).
D. The Lord’s Explanation of the Remnant of Israel’s Impoverishment (1:9-
11).
E. Response of the Remnant of Israel (1:12-15).
II. Second Message: The Glory of the Rebuilt Temple will Surpass the
Glory of Solomon’s Temple (2:1-9).
A. Introduction to the Message (2:1).
(1) Origin of the Message (2:1b).
(2) Date of the Message (2:1a).
(3) Recipients of the Message (2:1c).
B. The Lord’s Promise of His Enabling Presence (2:3-5).
173
John F. Walvoord, The Prophecy Knowledge Handbook (Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books, 1990), In two lengthy appendixes Walvoord lists the
scores of Bible prophecies with their now-past or yet-future fulfillments (pp. 647–769).

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 91

 C. The Lord’s Proclamation of the Future Glory of the Temple (2:6-9).
III. Third Message: The Lord’s Promise to Purify and Bless the Remnant of
Israel (2:10-19).
A. Introduction to the Message (2:10-11a).
(1) Date of the Message (2:10a).
(2) Origin of the Message (2:10b).
(3) Recipients of the Message (2:11a).
B. The Remnant of Israel Defiled by Sin (2:11b-14).
C. The Remnant of Israel’s Poor Harvests the Result of Disobedience (2:15-
17).
D. The Remnant of Israel Will Be Blessed as the Temple is Rebuilt (2:18-
19).
IV. Fourth Message: A Messianic Prophecy Concerning Zerubbabel (2:20-23).
A. The Introduction (2:20-21a).
(1) Origin of the Message (2:20a).
(2) Date of the Message (2:20b).
(3) Recipient of the Message (2:21a)
B. The Lord’s Proclamation to Judge the Gentile Nations in the Future
(2:21b-22).
C. The Lord’s Proclamation of the Restoration of the Davidic Kingdom
(2:23).

The Outline of Haggai in the Lexham Bible Dictionary

• 1:1–15a—Year two of Darius’ reign, month six, day one: It is time to rebuild
the temple so that God will be honored. Zerubbabel, Joshua, the high priest, and
the people obey.
• 1:15b–2:9—Year two, month seven, day 21: God says, “I am with you … as I
promised.” The restored temple will be greater than the one that had been
destroyed.
• 2:10–19—Year two, month nine, day 24: The people’s uncleanness had been a
factor in their difficult circumstances. God promises that the day they returned
to the Lord and laid the foundation of the new temple marked the turning point
toward blessing.
• 2:20–23—Year two, month nine, day 24 (a second message): God plans to
overthrow the power of existing kingdoms and to use Zerubbabel “like a signet
ring.”174

174
Scalise, P. J. (2016). Haggai, Book of. In J. D. Barry, D. Bomar, D. R. Brown, R. Klippenstein, D. Mangum, C. Sinclair Wolcott, … W.
Widder (Eds.), The Lexham Bible Dictionary. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 92

Eugene Merrill’s Outline of Haggai

I. Rebuilding the Temple (1:1-15)

A. Introduction and Setting (1:1)
B. The Exhortation to Rebuild (1:2-11)
1. The Indifference of the People (1:2-6)
2. The Instruction of the People (1:7-11)
C. The Response of God’s People (1:12-15)
1. Their Attitude (1:12)
2. Their Confidence (1:13)
3. Their Work (1:14-15)
II. The Glory to Come (2:1-9)
A. A Reminder of the Past (2:1-3)
B. The Presence of the Lord (2:4-5)
C. Outlook for the Future (2:6-9)
III. The Promised Blessing (2:10-19)
A. Present Ceremonial Defilement (2:10-14)
1. Righteousness Is Not Contagious (2:10-12)
2. Wickedness Is Contagious (2:13-14)
B. Present Judgment and Discipline (2:15-19)
1. The Rebuke of the People (2:15-17)
2. The Prospects of the People (2:18-19)
IV. Zerubbabel the Chosen One (2:20-23)
A. Divine Destruction (2:20-22)
B. Divine Deliverance (2:23)175

Richard A. Taylor’s Outline of Haggai

I. Haggai’s First Message: It Is Time to Rebuild the Temple! (1:1–11)

1. Introduction to the Message (1:1)
(1) Date of the Message (1:1a)
(2) Origin of the Message (1:1b)
(3) Recipients of the Message (1:1c)
2. The Lord Rejects the People’s Excuse for Their Delay in Rebuilding the
Temple (1:2)
3. The Lord Responds to the People through Haggai the Prophet (1:3–11)
(1) The Origin of the Prophet’s Message (1:3)
(2) The Cause and Consequence of Hard Times (1:4–11)
175
Merrill, Eugene H., An Exegetical Commentary: Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; www.bible.org.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 93

 Inverted Priorities of the People (1:4)
Unsuccessful Efforts of the People (1:5–6)
The Necessity of Obedience (1:7–11)
The Lord’s Requirement (1:7–8)
The Lord’s Discipline (1:9–11)
II. The People Respond to the Word of the Lord Given Through Haggai (1:12–
15a)
1. The People Respond Favorably to Haggai’s Message (1:12)
2. Haggai Reassures the People of the Lord’s Presence with Them (1:13)
3. The Leaders and the People Alike Commit Themselves to the Task of
Rebuilding the Temple (1:14–15a)
III.Haggai’s Second Message: The Glory of the Rebuilt Temple Will Surpass That
of Solomon’s Temple! (1:15b–2:9)
1. Introduction to the Message (1:15b–2:2)
(1) Date of the Message (1:15b–2:1a)
(2) Origin of the Message (2:1b)
(3) Recipients of the Message (2:2)
2. The Present Condition of the Temple Is Deplorable (2:3–5)
(1) An Unfavorable Comparison with the Former Temple (2:3)
(2) The Promise of Divine Presence and Strength (2:4–5)
3. The Future Condition of the Temple Will Be Glorious (2:6–9)
(1) Divine Intervention in the Cosmos (2:6)
(2) Financial Assistance from the Nations (2:7–8)
(3) The Splendor of the Rebuilt Temple (2:9)
IV. Haggai’s Third Message: Disobedience Produces Defilement, but Blessing
Will Attend Those Who Obey the Lord’s Commands! (2:10–19)
1. Introduction to the Message (2:10)
(1) Date of the Message (2:10a)
(2) Origin of the Message (2:10b)
2. The Lord Regards the People as Defiled (2:11–14)
(1) Principles of Conveyance of Purity and Defilement (2:11–13)
(2) Condition of the People (2:14)
3. Only Obedience Can Lead to Removal of Divine Discipline (2:15–19)
(1) Evidences of the Lord’s Discipline (2:15–17)
(2) Hope for the Future (2:18–19)
V. Haggai’s Fourth Message: The Lord Is Raising Up a New Leader! (2:20–23)
1. Introduction to the Message (2:20)
(1) Origin of the Message (2:20a)
(2) Date of the Message (2:20b)
2. The Lord Will Interrupt Human Events by Judgmental Action (2:21–22)
2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 94
 3. The Lord Will Sovereignly Establish Zerubbabel on the Davidic Throne
(2:23)176

176
Taylor, R. A., & Clendenen, E. R. (2004). Haggai, Malachi (Vol. 21A, p. 100). Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

2019 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries 95