Habakkuk 1:12

12. The prophet begins with an expression of confidence in his God. A better arrangement of the words would be:

Art not thou from everlasting, O Jehovah?

My God, my Holy One, not shall we die!

The first line is not an expression of despondency or doubt, but a rhetorical question to pave the way for the expression of confidence in the second line.

From everlasting Literally, from aforetime. The Hebrew word denotes an ancient period rather than eternity in the modern sense of that term; it is used often of the Mosaic age or other periods in Israel’s past (compare Micah 7:20; Psalms 44:1); even of a former period in a single lifetime (Job 29:2). The exact meaning in a given passage must be determined from the context. Allusion is frequently made to the eternity of Jehovah as a ground of confidence in him (Deuteronomy 33:27; Isaiah 40:28; Psalms 90:2). The English versions arrange the words differently; and some commentators understand them as equivalent to “Art not thou from everlasting my Holy One, O Jehovah, my God?” This arrangement gives to the words a meaning different from that which is indicated above. According to it the prophet is the spokesman of the people, expressing their confidence based not upon Jehovah’s eternity but upon the fact that he has been from everlasting the Holy One of Israel (see on Hosea 11:9), a title of Jehovah very common in Isaiah. As the holy one he is bound to sweep away the wicked Chaldeans.

We shall not die We shall not be utterly annihilated by the foe which is to be raised up (Habakkuk 1:6). The everlasting God will somehow preserve his people.

According to Jewish tradition “we shall not die” is an emendation of the scribes for “thou (Jehovah) shalt not die.” To speak of Jehovah in connection with death, even to deny his dying, was considered blasphemy by the scribes, therefore they changed the original into the present reading. If the second person is original the second line becomes simply a reiteration of the thought of the first line. The eighteen emendations of the scribes mentioned in Jewish tradition still present difficulties; in the present passage the Masoretic text is preferable. 12b passes to the complaint. Jehovah being the Holy One, his appointment of the godless Chaldeans as instruments of judgment creates a moral difficulty.

For judgment… for correction Either to execute judgment upon him and to administer correction to him, or, perhaps better, that he may execute punishment upon Judah and the other nations.

The perplexity caused by the appointment alluded to in 12b is further described in Habakkuk 1:13. Can the exaltation of a wicked and violent nation be harmonized with the belief in a holy and pure God? The present attitude seems to contradict the prophet’s conception of the divine character. He has always thought of God as too pure to look upon moral evil and perverseness; since he now selects the most wicked nation as his executioner, the prophet feels justified in challenging Jehovah to defend himself.

Deal treacherously The Chaldeans are unscrupulous, treacherous, and tyrannical. Is it right for Jehovah to look upon them with favor? Is it right that he should remain silent while they practice wickedness?

The man… more righteous than he With all their wickedness the people of Jehovah are better than the Chaldeans. How, then, can Jehovah justify himself for making the present choice? The same perplexed questioning is continued in Habakkuk 1:14. Wherefore does Jehovah permit the outrages of the Chaldeans?

Makest men as the fishes of the sea Defenseless, without rights, readily taken by the skillful fisherman.

As the creeping things Despised, and without a protector to take an interest in their well-being.

That have no ruler over them The relative is to be taken with “fishes” and with “creeping things.” They scatter in every direction when danger approaches; no ruler or commander directs their movements. So the nations are reduced to a state of confusion when they learn of the approach of the Chaldeans (compare Isaiah 10:13-14). Jehovah controls the movements of the Chaldeans, and is in a sense responsible for their conduct; but if they have gone beyond the divine commission (Isaiah 47:6-7; compare Isaiah 10:7) why does he not interfere?