Christ’s Woes upon the New Babylon: Matthew 23 and Habakkuk 2
“Woes” are especially prominent in the prophets, such as Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve. As for the New Testament, there are woes in Revelation. But the vast majority of New Testament woes are spoken by Christ in the Gospels, especially Matthew and Luke. Our Lord regularly pronounced woes on the wicked, which highlights that He was in fact a prophet, like the prophets of old.
In the book of Habakkuk, the prophet forthrightly complained to God not once but twice. He first complained about Israel’s wickedness (Habakkuk 1:1-4). And in response, God announced He would send the Chaldeans in judgment (1:5-11). (The Chaldeans are known also as the Neo-Babylonian Empire, which lasted from 626 to 529 BC.)
That is not what Habakkuk was hoping to hear. So he complained for a second time (1:12-17), saying that for God to use wicked people in this way is contrary to His nature. God then gave His second response to Habakkuk (2:2-20).
In this second response, God made clear that He would surely judge the wicked, including Babylon. He is indeed holy, as Habakkuk had rightfully declared in 1:12—“my Holy One” (NASB 1995). By no means would God leave the Chaldeans unpunished. As part of God’s response to Habakkuk, He pronounced five “woes” upon Babylon (Habakkuk 2:6-20). Such pronouncements of judgment are common in the Bible, especially in the prophetic literature.
The Five Woes (Habakkuk 2:6-20)
The first woe upon Babylon is for their theft (Habakkuk 2:6-8). God says that Babylon’s taking land from others is a “loan” (v. 6), and the “creditors” will rise up and take Babylon as “spoil” (vv. 7-8). Babylon was conquering nation after nation, taking their land and possessions. But the creditors will come looking for their money—“Will not your creditors rise up suddenly, And those who collect from you awaken? Indeed, you will become plunder for them” (v. 7). God is saying the creditors will come and “plunder” Babylon. Babylon’s time will come—“Because you have looted many nations, All the remainder of the peoples will loot you — Because of human bloodshed and violence done to the land, To the town and all its inhabitants” (v. 8).
God pronounces a second woe, this time for their greed (Habakkuk 2:9-11). He says, “Woe to him who gets evil gain for his house To put his nest on high, To be delivered from the hand of calamity!” (v. 9). The “house” represents the Babylonian Empire. Though not always clear in the English translations, very similar Hebrew language in v. 9 is used in Proverbs 15:27—“He who profits illicitly troubles his own house, But he who hates bribes will live.” Since God is the sovereign Judge of the earth, He ensures that illicit gain brings trouble on one’s house. The Chaldeans built up their house “by cutting off many peoples,” and they devised “a shameful thing” (v. 10). So God said that “the stone will cry out from the wall, and the rafter will answer it from the framework” (v. 11). That which made up the empire would cry out against Babylon (maybe referring to rebellion).
God announces a third woe for Babylon’s violence (Habakkuk 2:12-14). This woe is on the one “who builds a city with bloodshed and founds a town with violence” (v. 12), that is, building an empire unjustly. Founding a city was often considered an act of arrogance in Scripture, especially when built by violent men. This is seen with Cain (Genesis 4:17), Nimrod the mighty hunter (Genesis 10:8-12), Babel (Genesis 11:1-9), and Pharoah, who forced Israelite slaves to build cities (Exodus 1:11). Habakkuk 2:13 asks, “Is it not indeed from the LORD of hosts That peoples toil for fire, And nations grow weary for nothing?” The troubles of the nations are “from the LORD.”
This is followed by a verse that may seem out of place within the context here of God’s woes—“For the earth will be filled With the knowledge of the glory of the LORD, As the waters cover the sea” (Habakkuk 2:14). Yet while it may seem out of place, it is intentionally placed here at the center of the woes as a reminder that God is working all things to make His glory known among the earth, including His judgment. This is similar to Old Testament language about God’s glory filling the temple (Exodus 40:34-25; 1 Kings 8:11) and almost identical to some other passages (Numbers 14:21; Psalm 72:19).
Yet the closest parallel is Isaiah 11:9—“They will not hurt or destroy in all My holy mountain, For the earth will be full of the knowledge of the LORD As the waters cover the sea.” The context there is not judgment but the conversion of the nations (Isaiah 11:10-12) and justice throughout the earth (11:4-5, 13-15). God’s judgment and salvation are connected, as God is glorified in both judgment and salvation, and salvation is from judgment.
God announces a fourth woe on those who take advantage of their neighbors, using the imagery of making them drunk (Habakkuk 2:15-17). God says, “Woe to you who make your neighbors drink, Who mix in your venom even to make them drunk So as to look on their nakedness!” (v. 15). The Babylonians treated other nations harshly, which is compared to intoxicating them to humiliate them. In response to this, the Babylonians would suffer the same fate:
You will be filled with disgrace rather than honor. Now you yourself drink and expose your own nakedness. The cup in the LORD’S right hand will come around to you, And utter disgrace will come upon your glory. (Habakkuk 2:16)
Just as Babylon disgraced others, so Babylon would be disgraced. The language of “cup” usually refers to God’s wrath and judgment, meaning the Lord’s wrath would come upon Babylon. As v. 17 says of this judgment, “For the violence done to Lebanon will overwhelm you, And the devastation of its beasts by which you terrified them.”
-
Remembering God’s Word Unto Ourselves and Our Children
Hoping in Christ and clinging to His Word, and walking with Him by grace, believers don’t forget Him but remember Him—and this not only unto themselves; they remember Him to their children. This is the great purpose behind the use of confession and catechisms: that we ourselves would remember Him, and that we would teach the next generation, so that they would both remember Him for themselves and teach the generation yet to come.
Associate Reformed Presbyterians adhere to the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechisms—a wonderfully biblical thing to do, as we hope to see from Paul’s letters to Timothy next month. In this series of articles, I hope to convince you from Scripture of the necessity and wisdom of mastering and using our doctrinal standards, and then proceed to highlight from Scripture the riches in Christ that can be gained by way of some of our theological distinctives.
But, as a way of setting up for that, I’d like for us to consider from Psalm 78 Israel’s forgetfulness of the Lord and His Word—both in their own hearts (failing Deut 6:6) and to their children (failing Deut 6:7). This article will be best-read with your Bible open, taking the time to see each of the statements from the verses referenced.
Psalm 78:1–4 teaches us that telling to the next generation the praises of the good, great, saving God is an obligation not an option. v4 refers to failure to do so as “hiding” the “praises of the LORD and His strength and His wonderful works that He has done.”
vv5–7 tell us that God Himself established this “right” that covenant children possess, that they would receive instruction in the Word of God from one generation to the next. It is His appointed means by which successive generations would be brought to “hope in God and not forget the works of God but keep His commandments” (v7).
But the people of Israel up to the point of the Psalm’s writing had not been faithful to their purpose (v8). Not only did they forget to tell their children the wonderful works of God, they forgot those works for themselves—and so drifted from Him and rebelled against Him (vv10–11). Even those who saw the miraculous plagues and power by which He delivered them from Egypt, and by which He led them through the wilderness, forgot these works during their own lifetimes (vv12–20). And if they forgot Him for themselves, how can they have remembered Him to their children?
Although God was full of wrath against this (vv21–22), yet He responded with even more mercy and more miracles (vv23–30)—accompanied byreminders of His wrath against sin as in v31. Against such a backdrop, how marvelous is His grace that even their superficial and temporary repentings (vv32–37) were met with great compassion and forgiveness and restoration (vv38–39)!
Read More
Related Posts: -
Trinity & Paradox (A Defense Of Orthodoxy Against Modalism and Polytheism)
If God is one and all three persons of the Trinity are God, how does orthodox Christianity adequately deflect charges of modalism and polytheism? In other words, if the Father is God and the Son is God, how is the Son not merely an appearance of the Father if there is only one God (monotheism). Yet if the Father and the Son are not transitory manifestations of God but coexist as distinct divine persons, how is orthodox Christianity not another religion of the gods?
Before trying to address this conundrum, it might be helpful to consider some implications of an ancient Trinitarian creed.
We may distill these catholic claims from the Athanasian creed:
1. The Father is God2. The Son is God3. The Spirit is God4. The Father is not the Son5. The Father is not the Spirit6. The Son is not the Spirit7. There is only one God
An apparent contradiction is in view:
A. f = g (premise)B. s = g (premise)C. f ≠ g (premise)D. f = s (from 1 and 2, by the transitivity of identity)
Contradiction or Paradox?It seems to me that these conundrums can be dealt with adequately by supplementing additional biblically informed premises alongside the ambiguous ones. Simply augment some of the abbreviated premises with more biblical truth and paradox disappears, yet without being able to uncover the mysteries of the Trinity. (The solution is rational but ought not to be considered rationalistic.)
Is, =, and the law of identity:
It should be noted up front that there is a semantic difference between is and =, for x is y in common parlance does not necessarily imply y is x. Whereas x = y always is equivalent to y = x. For instance, Jim is human obviously does not mean the same thing as human is Jim. However, in some instances, the word is can imply a bidirectional truth or equivalent identity. For instance, there is an equivalence between Joe Biden is the 46th POTUS, and the 46th POTUS is Joe Biden. All that to say, we must be careful to discern what is intended by the verb is. Sometimes the meaning is one directional (e.g., Jim is human), and at other times the meaning is bidirectional (e.g., Joe Biden is the 46th POTUS). In the latter sense, is can be substituted with equals (=).
With that appreciation in place, we can now observe an undisclosed disconnect from what x is, (found in 1-7), to what x equals, (found in A-D). The basis for the inference found in A-D is sufficiently vague, which I trust will become apparent below. In other words, what does it mean that the Father is God? Does it, also, mean that God is the Father?
Points 1-3 (which utilize “is”) may merely suggest that three distinct persons all share the one divine essence and occupy “the same divine space” (perichoresis). Moreover, there is a qualified difference between each of the three persons when they are individually identified as God. Accordingly, the word “is” ought not to be taken to imply strict philosophical identity (in a creed no less!) without having first defined “God”.
Points A-D that follow (which utilize “=” instead of “is”) either creates, or uncovers, confusion (and possible paradox). Points 1-3 and A-D must be nuanced, for 1-3 does not imply the conclusion of A-D, which entails not only an apparent contradiction but rather, in light of 1-7, an ambiguity that keeps it (A-D) from being either coherent or contradictory. A-D suffers from an improper inference from 1-3. It needs clarification in light of the creed. The creed is not saying anything like God is not God, or the Son is not the Son! Hence, we may with confidence accept 1-7 without assuming it entails the paradox or actual contradiction implied in A-D.
Vague terms lead to unreliable conclusions:
If by God we mean the triune God, then obviously it is false that any divine person is God (i.e., the triune God). For instance, the Holy Spirit is not the Holy Trinity. Consequently, 1-3 is clearly false if God as Trinity is in view.
If by God we mean a divine person among other distinct divine persons, as opposed to a notion of the divine person, then 1-7 is orthodox, and D’s: f = s is not implied, alleviating the paradox in view. In other words, if each person of the Trinity is a distinct divine person (e.g. D1, D2 and D3), qualifying each as God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit respectively, then the personal properties of each person undermine the transitivity maintained in A-D.
Implicit modalism put to rest:
Not only can God mean Trinity, which the Son is not, God can also mean the person of the Holy Spirit, which the Son is not. Finally, God can mean the person of the Father, which the Son is not. Accordingly, to say that “the Son is God” and the “Father is God” without further qualification can be equivocal, and if taken in light of the law of identity, (as inferred by A-D without defining God), implies modalism because identity is transitive. The Son and the Father would be one and the same person, which the creed does not imply.
We may say in a colloquial-theological sense the Father is God just as we may say the Son is God, as long as we have the biblical backing that an unshared personal property of the Father is that he is unbegotten while the Son is eternally begotten etc. Being distinct persons, there are differences of eternal origin among all three persons of the Trinity who are one in being. The Father is divine, but doesn’t exist apart from his intra-Trinitarian begetting of the Son. That to say, the Father is not God apart from being a distinct divine person of the undivided Trinity. These Trinitarian relationships are necessary and eternal properties of personhood, not essence (lest the Father is the Son etc). They undermine any serious charge of modalism.
Read More -
Servants of Providence
For the believer, God’s providence is wondrous news. And the fact that He is purposeful in all His providence is even better news. As servants of providence, we are beneficiaries of a good, loving, faithful, just, and infinitely wise God. He alone is who we want and need as the Master of providence. Granted, His purposes are not always revealed or understood on this side of heaven.
I wonder how frequently you pose the question, “God, what are you doing in my life?” In August 2016, I incessantly wrestled with that question. A month prior my wife and I packed up our meager belongings and moved 2,260 miles to the Pacific Northwest. As we began driving on Interstate 94 for Mount Vernon, Washington, we were embarking on a new venture to a place where we had no established family, friends, or church. What brought us to the area was a missionary aviation training center in Arlington, Washington. But less than a month after arriving, I unenrolled from the program. The purpose for which we had uprooted our lives and moved across the country, from our standpoint, was now null.
Deliberate thought and prayer went into that decision, but the initial aftermath comprised of uncertainty, confusion, and doubt. As a newlywed, everything weighed heavier on my heart. Why were we there? Had I made a foolish decision? Was it a mistake? What’s next? Should we stay or move back home? How do we explain this to family and friends? What will this do to our marriage? These types of questions swirled around the bottomless pit in my head.
God, what are you doing?
A Servant of Providence
I often reflect back upon that season with fondness and gratitude. I didn’t see it at the time, but through those trying months, God was teaching me one of the sweetest lessons I’ve learned: be a servant of providence.
The fact that God’s providence affects all creation is biblically undeniable. He is providential over fish (Jon 1), worms (Jon 4), lions (Dan 6), lambs and wolves (Isa 11). He is providential over every decision, down to the casting of lots (Prov 16:33) and Satan himself (Job 1–2). Indeed, the entirety of Job 36–41 is a testimony of the power and parameter of His providence. Among all the hosts of heaven and all the inhabitants of the earth, no one can usurp His plans or strike His hand (Dan 4:35). He does whatever He pleases throughout the galaxies, upon the earth, and in the deep seas (Ps 135:6).
Proverbs 16:9 teaches us that while we plan (think upon) our course, Yahweh directs (establishes) our steps. This familiar passage must habitually humble us to be servants of providence. To acknowledge and surrender to the indisputable truth that we can’t control life. To hold our plans and dreams with open hands, submitting and surrendering our lives to the King. To approach life with a keen awareness that the Creator orchestrates every aspect of it and to trust Him in all circumstances, especially when outcomes aren’t immediately apparent.
Read More
Related Posts:
