HABAKKUK hə băk’ ək (Heb. חֲבַקּ֖וּק) embracer, wrestler; Gr. ̓Αμβακοὺ̀μ, Lat. Habacuc), the name of a prophet and of the eighth book of the Minor Prophets.

I. The prophet

His name is derived from a Heb. root (ḥ-v-q) denoting “to embrace.” It is rendered by Philo amplexans, “embracing,” by Jerome “wrestler,” “because he wrestled with God” (quia certamen ingreditur cum Deo, Prologue to Hab.). Luther and modern commentators have favored this derivation. “It is certainly not unfitting, for in this little book we see a man, in deadly earnest, wrestling with the mighty problem of theodicy—the divine justice—in a topsy-turvy world” (L. E. H. Stephens-Hodge). Other scholars relate this name to an Assyrian plant, hambaququ. We have, however, no certainty. Several legends attached themselves to this prophet. According to a Jewish tradition he was the son of the Shunammite woman. It stated that she would “embrace” a son (2 Kings 4:16). The Heb. word is hāvaq, but the identification with the prophet is excluded on account of the difference in time: this son was born more than a cent. before the prophet. According to a second tradition Habakkuk must be identified with the watchman referred to in Isaiah 21:6. The correspondence with Habakkuk 2:1 is, however, superficial, and does not fit the same age and situation. In the Apochryphal addition to the Book of Daniel (14:30-42), it is told that the prophet Habakkuk had to bring food to Daniel in the lions’ den. This interesting story, engraved on a fresco in the Catacombs in Rome, is, also however, a fiction. Daniel’s experience in the lions’ den was about seventy years after the time of Habakkuk’s activities.

We know nothing about Habakkuk apart from his name and the fact that he was called “the prophet” (1:1; 3:1). This does not justify the charge raised by some scholars that he was an ecstatic. Jeremiah himself is called a nabî (“prophet” 1:5; 20:2; 25:2; etc.). From Habakkuk 3:19b some have deduced that the prophet “evidently was a member of the Temple choir, hence a Levite” (Laetsch). The fact is, however, that the musical allusions in ch. 3 form a minor and superficial part of the prophecy, and could easily have been added to adapt this chapter for liturgical purposes (Ridderbos).

Although nothing definitely is known of the prophet, he speaks forth in his books in such a way that one could recognize in him a man dedicated to his task to bear the sins and anxieties of his people, and to wrestle with God in prayer and through faith. The testimony of Paul is applicable to him: “I have fought the good fight; I have finished the race, I have kept the faith” (2 Tim 4:7).

II. His book

A. Unity. A unity of theme runs throughout the book, and accordingly most traditional scholars maintain that the book must be conceived of as a whole. This does not exclude the possibility that separate passages were written down on different occasions (Van Katwyk, Aalders). According to critical scholars the book is of composite authoriship. The contention is that 1:5-11, the raising up of the Chaldeans to devastate the land, more or less interrupts the sequence of thought between the lamentations in 1:2-4 and 1:12-17. Some scholars (Wellhausen, Giesebrecht) delete these vv.; others (Budde, Rothstein) put them after 2:4; H. Schmidt (ZAW 62 [1949/50], 52-63) suggests that 1:2-4, 12, 13a and 3:17-19 are lamentations of an individual, which were added later to the scroll of Habakkuk. Conservative scholars recognize the difficulty in connection with 1:5-11, but contend that the problem can be solved by interpreting it as referring to an actual historical event (Young), or even by allowing a lapse of time between the announcement of the coming of the Chaldeans and their threatening of Judah shortly after Carchemish in 605 b.c. (Van Katwyk, Aalders).

Another disputed passage is ch. 3. This psalm is certainly somewhat different in style from the rest of the book, but this is hardly sufficient reason to deny Habakkuk’s authorship. Because of the superscription, the postcript, and the word Selah in vv. 3, 9, 13, the opinion was long current that this psalm passed from some liturgical collection of hymns into the Book of Habakkuk. According to Robert Pfeiffer the musical terms denote a late origin for this ch., presumably in the 4th or 3rd cent. b.c. Archer rightly observes that such an argument assumes the validity of the supposition that the musical terms in the Davidic psalms are late, and that despite Amos 6:5 and similar references, King David had nothing to do with music or song since he was a man of war. This, of course, is unacceptable “for those who take seriously the Biblical tradition that David was very much concerned with the writing and singing of psalms,” and that, therefore, such musical terms constitute no evidence of late authorship (A Survey, p. 345). Some critical scholars reverse the argument and assume that the hymn of Habakkuk, on account of its general character, was borrowed from the Book of Habakkuk for the liturgy (Duhm, Cannon, Sellin, Mowinckel). The fact that this chapter is introduced and concluded with musical terms is no reason for denying it to Habakkuk (Young, Aalders, Archer). The theme of ch. 3 is the same as that of the preceding chs. and there are also important similarities in language (cf. Young). In addition, ch. 3 is ascribed specifically to “Habakkuk the prophet” (3:1). The absence of the third ch. in the Habakkuk Commentary from the First Qumran Cave, is not an argument against the unity of the three chs., since the Qumran Commentaries in general present no continued development of thought (cf. Millar Burro ws, DSS 321, 322).

Albright’s contention that “The Psalm of Habakkuk,” although forming a substantial unit with the rest of the book, contains reminiscences of the myth of the conflict between Yahweh and the primordial dragon Sea or River, is interesting, but presupposes “some thirty-eight corrections of the Masoretic text,” and is, therefore, hardly convincing (in; Studies in OT Prophecy, presented to T. H. Robinson, Edinburgh [1950], 1-18).

B. Date. There is considerable division of opinion with regard to the date of the Book of Habakkuk. The only clear historical reference is found in 1:6: “For lo, I am rousing (Heb: meqîm) the Chaldeans.” The neo-Babylonian or Chaldean empire first came to prominence during the reign of Nabopolassar (625-605 b.c.), and esp. when his son Nebuchadnezzar (605-562 b.c.) defeated the Egyptians at the battle of Carchemish in 605 b.c., and re-established Babylon as the seat of world power. The raising up of the Chaldeans (v. 6) is described in v. 5 as a marvelous work of the Lord, so wholly unexpected as to seem unbelievable to the people in their day. According to some scholars this fact effectually disposes of the possibility of dating Habakkuk’s activity as beginning in Jehoiakim’s rule, when the Chaldeans already had gained the world supremacy by destroying Nineveh in 612 b.c. (Laetsch, Eissfeldt, Gemser). They, accordingly, prefer a date either during the last years of Manasseh’s reign (689-641 b.c.), or preferably in the early years of Josiah (639-609 b.c.). The majority of scholars, however, maintain that 1:6 has reference to the Chaldeans as an actual threat to Judah, and since such a threat seemed first to materialize at the battle of Carchemish, Habakkuk’s activity must have been during the reign of Jehoiakim (Young, Archer, Ridderbos). Albright ranges himself emphatically with this point of view, “seeing no valid reason why the book should not be treated as a substantial unit and dated between 605 and 589 b.c., i.e., between Nebuchadnezzar’s decisive victory over Necho at Carchemish and the beginning of the last invasion of Judah before the end of the First Temple” (op. cit., p. 2). This point of view is substantiated by 1:2-4, where the national depravity of the peo ple of God is being denounced. This implies a time after the death of Josiah (609), and corresponds with the description given in Jeremiah 22 of the reign of Jehoiakim (608-597 b.c.).

By changing the name “Chaldeans” in 1:6 to read “Kittim,” i.e., “Cypriots,” “Greeks,” some scholars bring the date of the prophecy down to the time of Macedonian conquest, c. 330 b.c. (Duhm, Torrey, Procksch). According to Paul Haupt the book must be dated in 161 b.c., just after the victory of Judas Maccabaeus over Nicanor (John Hopkins University Circular [1920], 680ff.). The procedure of changing the text of 1:6 is, however, subjective and without textual support.

C. Canonicity and text. The canonicity of the Book of Habakkuk was never seriously questioned. It always has retained the eighth place among the twelve so-called minor prophets.

According to Albright “the text is in better state of preservation than often supposed, though its archaic obscurity made it somewhat enigmatic even to the earliest translators” (op. cit., p. 2). He, however, proposes some thirty-eight corrections of the MT of ch. 3 (p. 10). Although some words or phrases are not easy to tr. (1:3, 9; 2:5, 7, 10, 15, 19; 3:9, 11, 13, 14, 16), there is hardly any reason for altering the Heb. text, as it is done in the RSV (1:9; 2:4, 15, 16, 17; 3:13, 14). Apart from a number of orthographical variations, the Habakkuk commentary (pēser) found in Cave one at Qumran (1Qp Hab), has substantially the same text as that of the first two chapters of our book.

D. Background. Habakkuk prayed and prophesied in times of crisis. Shortly before he began his ministry, the international scene was shocked by events of far-reaching import: the Assyrian Empire was crushed, never to regain its power; the Egyptians, after slaying Josiah, king of Judah (609 b.c.), were themselves utterly defeated (605 b.c.). The new world power, concentrated in Babylon and executed by the vigorous Nebuchadnezzar, was stretching itself across the breadth of the earth to seize habitations not their own. Within a period of approximately twenty years the Chaldeans swept over Judah in successive waves, and ultimately destroyed the country and took its inhabitants away into captivity (597, 587 b.c.).

Internally, the people of God were caught up in the crises of religious and moral bewilderment. The pious King Josiah was succeeded by Jehoiakim, who “did what was evil in the sight of the Lord, according to all that his fathers had done” (2 Kings 23:37). The situation of depravity is described in Habakkuk 1:2-4 (cf. Jer 22). The last two kings of Judah, viz. Jehoiachin (597 b.c.) and Zedekiah (597-587 b.c.) maintained the status quo, and ultimately were taken captive by the Chaldeans. In these times of national and international crisis, Habakkuk “rechtet mit Gott” (Walter Lüthi).

E. Content. The book may be subdivided into six sections.

1. 1:1-4. The prophet cries to God because of the violence, inequity, strife, contention and injustice he sees around him, and asks how long God would suffer it to go on unpunished. Some critics refer this passage to a heathen oppressor: the Chaldeans (Giesebrecht), the Assyrians (Budde, Gemser), or even the Egyptians (G. A. Smith, who compares 1:2-4 with 2 Kings 23:33-35). We agree with Archer that there is no good evidence in the text of 1:2-4 that heathen invaders are referred to; the manipulation of the law courts to favor the wealthy points to a domestic evil (op. cit., p. 344ff.).

2. 1:5-11. God answers that He is raising up the Chaldeans as His instrument of judgment, describing the fierceness of their armies and their contempt for any obstacle placed in their way.

3. 1:12-17. This answer plunges Habakkuk into a greater perplexity: How can a righteous God use the wicked Chaldeans to punish His people, which in spite of its apostasy, is still more righteous than they?

4. 2:1-4. The prophet waits upon the Lord. The answer, linked up with the history of God’s divine providence, comes in the assertion that the pride of the Chaldean will be his downfall and the faith of the believer will be his salvation.

5: 2:5-20. A taunt-song (măsāl) is addressed presumably to the Chaldean king, consisting of a series of five woes against aggression (vv. 6b-8), self-assertion (vv. 9-11), violence (vv. 12-14), inhumanity (vv. 15-17), and idolatry (vv. 18-20).

6. 3:1-19. This psalm, voiced by the prophet, but on behalf of his people, is the “amen of faith” to the revelation of God. The prophet describes the divine manifestation in terms of a stormy theophany (3:2-15), with allusions to the mighty deeds of God in the history of the deliverance of Israel from Egypt. The impression created by this theophany is awe-inspiring (3:2, 16a). No matter what may befall them, the prophet and his people shall trust in God (3:16-19).

F. Theology. The content of this book is characterized as an oracle or burden (Heb. massa’, cf. Isa 13:1; 14:28; etc.) which Habakkuk the prophet saw. Its purport, therefore, is to represent the word of God. It is evident, however, that the prophecy of Habakkuk has a unique form. It consists partly of lamentations which the prophet addresses to God (1:2-4, 12-17; 2:1; 3:1-19), and partly of prophetic utterances (1:5-11; 2:2-20). Archer rightly observes that with the possible exception of Daniel, no other Biblical author employs this particular technique (op. cit., p. 346). We may, however, assume that the whole content of Habakkuk’s book is meant as revelation, as the imparting of God’s message to His people.

On the material side, the content of this prophecy is characterized by the following:

1. By the prophet’s orientation toward God. He calls Him “Lord” (1:2, 12; 2:2, 13, 14, 16, 20; 3:2, 8, 18, 19), “my God” (1:12; 3:3, 18, 19), “my Holy One” (1:12; 3:3), and “O Rock” (1:12); he acknowledges Him as the supreme Judge (1:2-4), as the God of the everlasting covenant (1:12), as the sovereign Ruler of all nations (1:5, 17; 2:12; 3:6, 12) and of all nature (3:3-11), the God who answers prayer (2:2), delivers His people (2:3; 3:13, 16, 18, 19), destines the course of history (2:3; 3:2), and fills the earth with the knowledge of His glory (2:14).

2. By his reaction against sin. The prophet is well aware of the sins of his people, of their political oppression, social wrongs and the prevailing manipulation of the law courts (1:2-4). He not only observes it, but he testifies against it, and cries out to God to correct it. He also is conscious of the sins of the world power, its covetousness (1:6, 8, 9, 13-17), haughty self-assertion (1:7, 11, 16; 2:4), idolatry (2:18-19), and violence (1:17; 2:5-17).

3. By the objective and subjective aspects of his message. Habakkuk called forth the judgment of the Lord first upon Judah, and subsequently upon the Chaldeans. This is the objective aspect of his message. In the course of time both prophecies of judgment were fulfilled. The oppressing nobilities first were taken into captivity in the two preliminary deportations of 605 and 597, and this was followed by the major deportation in 587 b.c. The prospect of a destroyed country (3:17), became a grim reality. God indeed was not an inactive Onlooker on the scene of His people. With these calamities the waiting time for the righteous remnant began (2:2, 3; 3:2). At the appointed time, the Chaldeans were judged (539 b.c.) and the captives of Judah allowed to return to the Promised Land.

The subjective aspect of Habakkuk’s message is that the righteous shall live by his faith. Apart from Isaiah (7:9; 28:16), no other prophet stressed the significance of faith and prayerful trust in such a way as did Habakkuk. Though the land may be stripped bare by the subsequent judgments of God, yet he will rejoice in the Lord (3:17, 18). The central theme of Habakkuk’s prophecy, viz. that the righteous shall live by his faith (2:4), is taken up in the NT, and applied in significant contexts (Rom 1:17; Gal 3:11; Heb 10:38, 39).

Bibliography O. Happel, Das Buch des Propheten Habackuk (1900); D. J. van Katwyk, De Profetie van Habakkuk (1912); W. Cannon, “The Integrity of Habakkuk 1-2,” ZAW 43 (1925), 62-90; H. Walter and N. Lund, “The Literary Structure of the Book of Habakkuk,” JBL 53 (1934), 335-370; C. C. Torrey, “The Prophecy of Habakkuk,” in Jewish Studies in Memory of George A. Kohut (1935); W. Irwin, “The Psalm of Habakkuk,” JNES 1 (1942), 10-40; P. Humbert, Problèmes du livre d’Habacuc, Neuchatel (1944); H. Schmidt, “Ein Psalm im Buche Habakuk,” ZAW 62 (1949/50), 52-63; W. F. Albright, “The Psalm of Habakkuk,” in Studies in Old Testament Prophecy, presented to T. H. Robinson...(1950), 1-18; S. Mowinckel, “Zum Psalm des Habakuk,” ThL (1953), 1-22; K. Elliger, Studien zum Habakuk-kommentar vom Toten Meer (1953); D. M. Lloyd-Jones, From Fear to Faith....(1953); J. Trinquet, Habaquq, Abdias, Joël (1953); Ph. Béguerie, Etudes sur les prophètes d’Israël (1954) (Lectio divina 14); W. Vischer, Der Prophet Habakuk (1958); W. H. Brownlee, The Text of Habakkuk in the ancient commentary from Qumran (1959); A. Strobel, Untersuchungen zum eschatologischen-Verzögerungsproblem, auf Grund der spätjüdisch-urchristlichen Geschichte von Habakuk 2, 2ff. (1961); W. H. Brownlee, “The Placarded Revelation of Habakkuk,” JBL 82 (1963), 319-325; J. H. Eaton, “The Origin and Meaning of Habakkuk 3,” LAIS, 76 (1964), 144-171; A. S. vander Wande, “Der Gerechte wird durch seene Treue leben. Erwägungen zu Habakkuk 2:4-5,” in Studia biblica et semitica Th. C. Vriezen dedicata (1966), 367-375.