HA ([ ja;h, , he’-ah ]): In Job 39:25, the Revised Version (British and American) “Aha,” of the battle-horse. See AH, AHA.

HAAHASHTARI ([ yriT;v]j”a\h; , ha’-achashtari ], possibly a corruption of [ yriWjv]a”h; , ha’-ashchuri ]): A descendant of Judah ( 1 Chronicles 4:6). The name is probably corrupt. If the emendation suggested above is accepted, it means the Ashurites, and is a description of the preceding names.

HABAIAH; HOBAIAH , ([ hy;b;j\ , cha-bhayah ], [ hy;b;jÜ , chobhayah ]): A post-exilic priestly family which was unable to establish its pedigree. “Habaiah” is the form in Ezra 2:61; in the parallel passage ( Nehemiah 7:63), the King James Version has “Habaiah,” and the Revised Version (British and American) “Hobaiah”; in the parallel passage in 1 Esdras 5:38, the form is [ jObdia>, Obdia ], Codex Vaticanus, Obbeia .

HABAKKUK , :

I. THE AUTHOR. 1. Name: Habakkuk ([ qWQb”j\ , chabhaqquq ]) means “embrace,” or “ardent embrace.” Some of the ancient rabbis, connecting the name with Kings 4:16, “Thou shalt embrace a son,” imagined that the prophet was the son of the Shunammite woman. The Septuagint form of the name, Hambakoum ; Theodotion Hambakouk , presupposes the Hebrew chabbaquq . A similar word occurs in Assyrian as the name of a garden plant. 2. Life: Practically nothing is known of Habakkuk. The book bearing his name throws little light upon his life, and the rest of the Old Testament is silent concerning him; but numerous legends have grown up around his name.

The identification of the prophet with the son of the Shunammite woman is one. Another, connecting Isaiah 21:6 with Habakkuk 2:1, makes Habakkuk the watchman set by Isaiah to watch for the fall of Babylon. One of the recensions of the Septuagint text of Bel and the Dragon declares that the story was taken “from the prophecy of Habakkuk, the son of Jesus of the tribe of Levi.” This must refer to an unknown apocryphal book ascribed to our prophet. What authority there may be for calling his father Jesus we do not know. The claim that he was of the tribe of Levi may be based upon the presence of the musical note at the end of the third chapter.

According to the Lives of the Prophets, ascribed, though perhaps erroneously, to Epiphanius, bishop of Salamis in Cyprus during the latter part of the 4th century AD, he belonged to [Bethtsohar], of the tribe of Simeon. A very interesting story is found in Bel and the Dragon (33-39), according to which Habakkuk, while on his way to the field with a bowl of pottage, was taken by an angel, carried to Babylon and placed in the lions den, where Daniel ate the pottage, when Habakkuk was returned to his own place. According to the Lives, Habakkuk died two years before the return of the exiles from Babylon. All these legends have little or no historical value.

II. THE BOOK. 1. Interpretation of Habakkuk 1 and 2: It is necessary to consider the interpretation of Habakkuk 1 and 2 before giving the contents of the book, as a statement of the contents of these chapters will be determined by their interpretation. The different interpretations advocated may be grouped under three heads: (1) According to the first view: Habakkuk 1:2-4: The corruption of Judah; the oppression of the righteous Jews by the wicked Jews, which calls for the Divine manifestation in judgment against the oppressors. 1:5- 11: Yahweh announces that He is about to send the Chaldeans to execute judgment. 1:12-17: The prophet is perplexed. He cannot understand how a righteous God can use these barbarians to execute judgment upon a people more righteous than they. He considers even the wicked among the Jews better than the Chaldeans. 2:1-4: Yahweh solves the perplexing problem by announcing that the exaltation of the Chaldeans will be but temporary; in the end they will meet their doom, while the righteous will live. 2:5-20:

Woes against the Chaldeans. (2) The second view finds it necessary to change the present arrangement of Habakkuk 1:5-11; in their present position, they will not fit into the interpretation. For this reason Wellhausen and others omit these verses as a later addition; on the other hand, Giesebrecht would place them before 1:2, as the opening verses of the prophecy. The transposition would require a few other minor changes, so as to make the verses a suitable beginning and establish a smooth transition from 1:11 to 1:2. Omitting the troublesome verses, the following outline of the two chapters may be given: 1:2-4: The oppression of the righteous Jews by the wicked Chaldeans. 1:12-17:

Appeal to Yahweh on behalf of the Jews against their oppressors. 2:1-4:

Yahweh promises deliverance (see above). 2:5-20: Woes against the Chaldeans. (3) The third view also finds it necessary to alter the present order of verses. Again Habakkuk 1:5-11, in the present position, interferes with theory; therefore, these verses are given a more suitable place after 2:4.

According to this interpretation the outline is as follows: 1:2-4: Oppression of the righteous Jews by the wicked Assyrians (Budde) or Egyptians (G. A.

Smith). 1:12-17: Appeal to Yahweh on behalf of the oppressed against the oppressor. 2:1-4: Yahweh promises deliverance (see above). 1:5-11: The Chaldeans will be the instrument to execute judgment upon the oppressors and to bring deliverance to the Jews. 2:5-20: Woes against the Assyrians or Egyptians.

A full discussion of these views is not possible in this article (see Eiselen, Minor Prophets, 466-68). It may be sufficient to say that on the whole the first interpretation, which requires no omission or transposition, seems to satisfy most completely the facts in the case. 2. Contents: The contents of Habakkuk 1 and 2 are indicated in the preceding paragraph. Habakkuk 3 contains a lyrical passage called in the title “Prayer.” The petitioner speaks for himself and the community. He remembers the mighty works of Yahweh for His people; the thought of them causes him to tremble; nevertheless, he calls for a repetition of the ancient manifestations (3:2). In majestic pictures the poet describes the wonderful appearances of Yahweh in the past (3:3-11) for His chosen people (3:12-15). The remembrance of these manifestations fills the Psalmist with fear and trembling, but also with joy and confidence in the God of his salvation (3:16-19). 3. Style: Only the Hebrew student can get an adequate idea of the literary excellence of the Book of Habakkuk. “The literary power of Habakkuk,” says Driver, “is considerable. Though his book is a brief one, it is full of force; his descriptions are graphic and powerful; thought and expression are alike poetic; he is still a master of the old classical style, terse, parallelistic, pregnant; there is no trace of the often prosaic diffusiveness which manifests itself in the writings of Jeremiah and Ezekiel. And if Habakkuk be his, he is, moreover, a lyric poet of high order; the grand imagery and the rhythmic flow of this ode will bear comparison with some of the finest productions of the Hebrew muse.” 4. Integrity: More than half of the book, including Habakkuk 1:5-11; 2:9-20, and chapter 3 entire, has been denied to the prophet Habakkuk. If the prophecy is rightly interpreted (see above), no valid reason for rejecting 1:5-11 can be found. Habakkuk 2:9-20 are denied to Habakkuk chiefly on two grounds: (1) The “woes” are said to be in part, at least, unsuitable, if supposed to be addressed to the Chaldean king. This difficulty vanishes when it is borne in mind that the king is not addressed as an individual, but as representing the policy of the nation, as a personification of the nation. (2) Some parts, especially 2:12-14, “consist largely of citations and reminiscences of other passages, including some late ones” (compare 2:12 with Micah 3:10; Habakkuk 2:13 with Jeremiah 51:58; Habakkuk 2:14 with Isaiah 11:9; Hab. 2:16b with Jeremiah 25:15,16; Habakkuk 2:18-20 with Isaiah 44:9 ff; 46:6,7; Jeremiah 10:1-16). Aside from the fact that the argument from literary parallels is always precarious, in this case the resemblances are few in number and of such general character that they do not necessarily presuppose literary dependence. Habakkuk 3 is denied to the prophet even more persistently, but the arguments are by no means conclusive. The fact that the chapter belongs to the psalm literature does not prove a late date unless it is assumed, without good reasons, that no psalms originated in the preexilic period. Nor do the historical allusions, which are altogether vague, the style, the relation to other writers, and the character of the religious ideas expressed, point necessarily to a late date. The only doubtful verses are 2:16 ff, which seem to allude to a calamity other than the invasion of the Chaldeans; and Driver says, not without reason, “Had the poet been writing under the pressure of a hostile invasion, the invasion itself would naturally have been expected to form a prominent feature in this picture.” Hence, while it may be impossible to prove that Habakkuk is the author of the prayer, it is equally impossible to prove the contrary; and while there are a few indications which seem to point to a situation different from that of Habakkuk, they are by no means definite enough to exclude the possibility of Habakkuk’s authorship.

III. THE TIME. 1. Date: The question of date is closely bound up with that of interpretation. Budde, on theory that the oppressors, threatened with destruction, are the Assyrians (see above, 3), dates the prophecy 621 to 615 BC. Granting that the Assyrians are in the mind of the prophet, the date suggested by Betteridge (AJT, 1903, 674 ff), circa 701 BC, is to be preferred; but if the Assyrians are not the oppressors, then with the Assyrians fall the dates proposed by Budde and Betteridge. If the prophecy is directed against Egypt, we are shut up to a very definite period, between 608 and 604 BC, for the Egyptian supremacy in Judah continued during these years only. If the Egyptians are not the oppressors, another date will have to be sought.

If the Chaldeans are the oppressors of Judah, the prophecy must be assigned to a date subsequent to the battle of Carchemish in 605-604, for only after the defeat of the Egyptians could the Chaldeans carry out a policy of world conquest; and it was some years after that event that the Chaldeans first came into direct contact with Judah. But on this theory, Habakkuk 1:2-4,12 ff; 2:8 ff, presupposes the lapse of a considerable period of conquest, the subduing of many nations, the cruel oppression of Judah for some length of time; therefore, Nowack is undoubtedly correct, on this theory, in bringing the prophecy down to a period subsequent to the first exile in 597, or, as he says, “in round numbers about 590 BC.”

A different date must be sought if Habakkuk 1:2-4 is interpreted as referring to the oppression of Jews by Jews, and 1:5 ff, as a threat that Yahweh will raise up the Chaldeans, already known as a nation thirsting for blood, to punish the wickedness of Judah. These verses would seem to indicate (1) that the Chaldeans had not yet come into direct contact with Judah, and (2) that they had already given exhibitions of the cruel character of their warfare. Nebuchadnezzar advanced against Judah about 600 BC; but the years since the fall of Nineveh, in 607-606, and the battle of Carchemish, in 605-604, had given abundant opportunity to the Chaldeans to reveal their true character, and to the prophet and his contemporaries to become acquainted with this cruel successor of Nineveh. On this theory, therefore, the prophetic activity of Habakkuk must be assigned to shortly before 600 BC. 2. Occasion: If Habakkuk prophesied about 600 BC, he lived under King Jehoiakim.

The pious and well-meaning Josiah had been slain in an attempt to stop the advance of Egypt against Assyria. With his death the brief era of reform came to an end. After a reign of three months Jehoahaz was deposed by Pharaoh-necoh, who placed Jehoiakim on the throne. The latter was selfish, tyrannical and godless. In a short time the deplorable conditions of Manasseh’s reign returned. It was this situation that caused the prophet’s first perplexity: “O Yahweh, how long shall I cry, and thou wilt not hear? I cry out unto thee of violence, and thou wilt not save” ( Habakkuk 1:2).

IV. ITS TEACHING.

In the Book of Habakkuk a new type of prophecy appears. The prophets were primarily preachers and teachers of religion and ethics. They addressed themselves to their fellow-countrymen in an attempt to win them back to Yahweh and a righteous life. Not so Habakkuk. He addresses himself to Yahweh, questioning the justice or even the reality of the Divine Providence. He makes complaint to God and expostulates with Him. The prophet Habakkuk, therefore, is a forerunner of the author of the Book of Job. “As a whole, his book is the fruit of religious reflection. It exhibits the communings and questionings of his soul — representative, no doubt, of many other pious spirits of the time — with God; and records the answers which the Spirit of God taught him for his own sake and for the sake of tried souls in every age.

Habakkuk has been called the prophet of faith. He possessed a strong, living faith in Yahweh; but he, like many other pious souls, was troubled and perplexed by the apparent inequalities of life. He found it difficult to reconcile these with his lofty conception of Yahweh. Nevertheless, he does not sulk. Boldly he presents his perplexities to Yahweh, who points the way to a solution, and the prophet comes forth from his trouble with a faith stronger and more intense than ever. It is in connection with his attempts to solve the perplexing problems raised by the unpunished sins of his countrymen and the unlimited success of the Chaldeans that Habakkuk gives utterance to two sublime truths: 1. The Universal Supremacy of Yahweh: Yahweh is interested not only in Israel. Though Habakkuk, like the other prophets, believes in a special Divine Providence over Israel, he is equally convinced that Yahweh’s rule embraces the whole earth; the destinies of all the nations are in His hand. The Chaldeans are punished not merely for their sins against Judah, but for the oppression of other nations as well.

Being the only God, He cannot permit the worship of other deities.

Temporarily the Chaldeans may worship idols, or make might their god, they may “sacrifice unto their net,” and burn incense “unto their drag,” because by them “their portion is fat and their food plenteous”; but Yahweh is from everlasting, the Holy One, and He will attest His supremacy by utterly destroying the boastful conqueror with his idols. 2. Faithfulness the Guarantee of Permanency: The second important truth is expressed in Habakkuk 2:4: “The righteous shall live by his faith” (the American Revised Version, margin “faithfulness”). Faithfulness assures permanency. The thought expressed by the prophet is not identical with that expressed by the apostle who quotes the words ( Galatians 3:11); nevertheless, the former also gives expression to a truth of profound significance. “Faithfulness” is with the prophet an external thing; it signifies integrity, fidelity, steadfastness under all provocations; but this implies, in a real sense, the New Testament conception of faith as an active principle of right conduct. A living faith determines conduct; religion and ethics go hand in hand, and especially in the hour of adversity a belief in Yahweh and unflinching reliance upon Him are the strongest preservers of fidelity and integrity. Faith without works is dead; faith expresses itself in life. Habakkuk places chief emphasis upon the expressions of faith, and he does so rightly; but in doing this he also calls attention, by implication at least, to the motive power behind the external manifestations. As an expression of living faith, 3:17-19 is not surpassed in the Old Testament.

LITERATURE.

Commentaries on the Minor Prophets by Ewald, Pusey, Keil, Orelli, G. A.

Smith (Expositor’s Bible), Driver (New Century Bible), Eiselen; A. B.

Davidson, Commentary on “Nah,” “Hab,” “Zeph” (Cambridge Bible); A.

F. Kirkpatrick, Doctrine of the Prophets; F. C. Eiselen, Prophecy and the Prophets; F. W. Farrar, Minor Prophets (“Men of the Bible”); Driver, LOT; HDB, article “Habakkuk”; EB, article “Habakkuk.” Frederick Carl Eiselen HABAKKUK, THE PRAYER OF See BETHHORON, BATTLE OF.

HABAZINIAH ([ hy;n]Xib”j\ , chabhatstsinyah ]. Thus in the King James Version, but more correctly as in the Revised Version (British and American) HABAZZINIAH , hab-a-zi-ni’-a (Jeremiah 35,3)): The grandfather of Jaazaniah, who was the leader of the Rechabites who were tested by Jeremiah as to their obedience to their ancestor’s command with reference to wine. Their loyalty to the commands of Jonadab was effectively used by Jeremiah in an appeal to the people of Judah to obey the words of Yahweh.

HABERGEON , , the King James Version ([ ar;j\T” , tachara’ ]): In the Revised Version (British and American), Exodus 28:32; 39:23, etc., “coat of mail”; in Job 41:26, “pointed shaft,” margin “coat of mail.” See ARMS, ARMOR.

HABITATION shun> : Properly a place of sojourn or dwelling. The term in the King James Version representing some 16 Hebrew words (moshabh , ma`- on , mishkan , naweh , etc.), and 5 Greek words, is variously changed in certain passages in the Revised Version (British and American), as Genesis 49:5, “swords”; Leviticus 13:46 “dwelling”; Job 5:24; Jeremiah 25:30b,37, “fold”; Psalm 89:14; 97:2, etc., “foundation”; <19D205> Psalm 132:5, “tabernacle”; Luke 16:9, “tabernacles,” etc.

Conversely, “habitation” appears in the Revised Version (British and American) for the King James Version “dwelling place” in 2 Chronicles 30:27; Psalm 79:7, “house”; Psalm 83:12; 2 Corinthians 5:2, “tabernacle,” Acts 7:46, etc. See HOUSE.

James Orr HABOR ([ rwObj; , chabhor ]; [ Jabw>r, Habor ], [ Jabiw>r, Habior ]; Isidor of Charax, Aburas ([ jAboura>v, Abouras ]), Zosias, Aboras):

1. ITS POSITION AND COURSE:

Is described in 2 Kings 17:6; 18:11 (compare 1 Chronicles 5:26) as “the river of Gozan.” It is the Arabic Khabur, and flows in a southerly direction from several sources in the mountains of Karaj Dagh (Mons Masius), which, in the 37th parallel, flanks the valley of the Tigris on the West. The river ultimately joins the Euphrates after receiving its chief tributary, the Jaghjagha Su (Mygdonius), at Circesium (Kirkisiyeh).

2. ETYMOLOGIES OF HABOR:

The meaning of its name is doubtful, but Delitzsch has suggested a Sumerian etymology, namely, habur , “the fish-waterway,” or it may be connected with “mother Hubur’ ” a descriptive title of Tiamat (see MERODACH; RAHAB).

3. HISTORICAL REFERENCES:

Layard found several interesting Assyrian remains in the district, including man-headed bulls bearing the name of Muses-Ninip, possibly an Assyrian governor. Tiglath-pileser I (circa 1120 BC) boasts of having killed mighty elephants in Haran and on the banks of the Habor; and Assur-nacirapli (circa 880 BC), after conquering Harsit (Harrit, Harmis), subjugated the tract around piate sa nar Habur, “the mouths of the Habor.” According to 2 Kings and 1 Chronicles, Shalmaneser IV and Sargon transported the exiled Israelites thither. Philological considerations exclude the identification of the Chebar of Ezekiel 13, etc., with the Habor. T. G. Pinches HACALIAH ([ hy;l]k”j\ , chakhalyah ], meaning doubtful, perhaps “wait for Yahweh”; the King James Version Hachaliah): Father of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 11; 10:1).

HACHILAH, HILL OF , , ([ hl;ykij\ , chakhilah ]): A hill in the wilderness of Judah, associated with the wanderings of David. It is stated ( Samuel 23:19) to be “on the South of the desert” (or Jeshimon), and ( <092601> Samuel 26:1) to be “before (on the front (i.e. edge) of) the desert.” It was near Ziph and Maon. The only plausible hypothesis is that it is represented by the ridge Dhahret el-Kolah in the wilderness of Ziph, toward the desert of En-gedi (PEF, III, 313, Sh XXI).

HACHMONI; HACHMONITE , , or probably ([ yniwOmk]j” , chakhmoni ], “wise”): The same word is rendered “Hachmoni,” a proper name, in Chronicles 27:32 and “a Hachmonite” in 1 Chronicles 11:11. The form of the Hebrew word suggests that the latter translation should be adopted in both passages, and that it describes the warrior in one case, and the companion or tutor of David’s sons in the other, as a member of a certain family — a Hachmonite of which nothing further is known. 2 Samuel 23:8, “Josheb-basshebeth a Tahchemonite,” bears the marks of a corrupt text, and should be parallel with 1 Chronicles 11:11 so far as the name goes, reading “Jashobeam the Hachmonite.” So Klostermann, Driver, Wellhausen, Budde, etc. George Rice Hovey HADAD : (1) ([ dd”j\ , chadhadh ], “sharpness”): One of the twelve sons of Ishmael ( Genesis 25:15, where the King James Version, following a mistake in Hebrew text, has “Hadar”; but “Hadad” is found in parallel passage Chronicles 1:30; the Revised Version (British and American) reads “Hadad” in both places). (2) ([ dd”h\ , hadhadh ]): A king of Edom, son of Bedad ( Genesis 36:35,36 parallel 1 Chronicles 1:46,47), “who smote Midian in the field of Moab,” and whose “city was Avith.” (3) Another king of Edom, written “Hadar” in Genesis 36:39 by a copyist’s mistake, but “Hadad” in the parallel passage 1 Chronicles 1:50,51. His city was Pau or Palestine. (4) A member of the royal family of Edom in David’s time, who as a child escaped Joab’s slaughter of the Edomites, and fled to Egypt. On David’s death he returned to Edom, where he made trouble for Solomon by stirring up the Edomites against the rule of Israel ( 1 Kings 11:14-22,25). (5) The supreme god of Syria, whose name is found in Scripture in the names of Syrian kings, Benhadad, Hadadezer. The god Hadad (= perhaps, “maker of loud noise”) is mentioned in Assyrian inscriptions, and called on the monolith of Shalmaneser “the god of Aleppo.” In the Assyrian inscriptions he is identified with the air-god Rammon or Rimmon. The union of the two names in Zec 12:11 suggests this identity, though the reference is uncertain, some regarding Hadadrimmon as the name of a place, others as the name of the god — “Hadad (is) Rimmon.” The name “Hadad” is found in various other forms: Adad, Dadu, and Dadda. See A.

H. Sayce in HDB under the word “Hadad.” George Rice Hovey HADADEZER ([ rz,[,d]d”h\ , hadhadh`ezer ]; so 2 Samuel 8; 1 Kings 11:23, but [ rz,[,r]d”h\ , hadhar`ezer ], 2 Samuel 10; 1 Chronicles 18):

Mentioned in connection with David’s wars of conquest ( 2 Samuel 8:3 ff; 2 Samuel 10:1-19; 1 Chronicles 18:3 ff); was king of Zobah in Syria. The exact position and size of this Syrian principality are uncertain, but it seems to have extended in David’s time southward toward Ammon and eastward to the Euphrates. When the Ammonites had put themselves in the wrong with David by the insult done to his ambassadors ( <101001> Samuel 10:1-5) they summoned to their aid against the incensed king of Israel the Syrians of various adjoining principalities, among them the Syrians of Zobah under Hadadezer, the son of Rehob. The strategy of Joab, who set the force under command of Abishai his brother in array against the Ammonites, and himself attacked the Syrian allies, won for Israel a decisive victory. Not content with this result, Hadadezer gathered together another Syrian force, summoning this time also “the Syrians that were beyond the River” ( 2 Samuel 10:16), with Shobach the captain of his host at their head. On this occasion David himself took command of the Israelite forces and again defeated them near Helam, Shobach being left dead on the field. Hadadezer and his Syrian vassals, finding resistance hopeless, “made peace with Israel and served them” ( 2 Samuel 10:19).

For the name Hadador Hadarezer, see BENHADAD.

LITERATURE.

Winckler, Geschichte Israels, I, 137 ff; McCurdy, HPM, 204; Maspero, The Struggle of the Nations, 731. T. Nicol.

HADADRIMMON , ([ ˆwOMri dd”h\ , hadhadh rimmon ]): A name which occurs, along with Megiddon, in Zec 12:11. It was long thought that this was a place in the plain of Megiddo, and that the mourning referred to was that for Josiah, slain in battle with Pharaoh-necoh ( 2 Kings 23:29). This last, however, was certainly at Jerusalem. Jerome (Comm. on Zec) identifies Hadadrimmon with Maximianopolis, a village near Jezreel, probably Legio, the ancient Megiddo. Possibly, however, the form “Hadadrimmon” has arisen through the combination of two divine names; and the weeping may be that for Tammuz ( Ezekiel 8:14), with whom the old Semitic deity had become confused in the popular mind. W. Ewing HADAR ( Genesis 36:39). See HADAD (3).

HADAREZER . See HADADEZER.

HADASHAH , ([ hv;d;j\ , chadhashah ], “new”): A town in the Shephelah of Judah, named with Zenan and Migdal-gad ( Joshua 15:37). According to the Mishna ([`Erubhin], v. 6), it was the smallest town in Judah. It is not identified.

HADASSAH ([ hS;d”h\ , hadhaqqah ], “myrtle”): The Hebrew name ( Esther 2:7) formerly borne by ESTHER (which see).

HADATTAH ([ hT;d”j\ , chadhattah ], “new”): See HAZOR.

HADES ([ \Aidhv, Haides ], [a[|dhv, haides ], “not to be seen”): Hades, Greek originally Haidou , in genitive, “the house of Hades,” then, as nominative, designation of the abode of the dead itself. The word occurs in the New Testament in Matthew 11:23 (parallel Luke 10:15); Matthew 16:18; Luke 16:23; Acts 2:27,31; Revelation 1:18; 6:8; 20:13 f. It is also found in Textus Receptus of the New Testament 1 Corinthians 15:55, but here the correct reading (Tischendorf, Westcott and Hort, The New Testament in Greek, the Revised Version (British and American)) is probably Thanate , “O Death,” instead of Haide , “O Hades.” the King James Version renders “Hades” by “hell” in all instances except 1 Corinthians 15:55, where it puts “grave” (margin “hell”) in dependence on Hosea 13:14. the Revised Version (British and American) everywhere has “Hades.”

1. IN OLD TESTAMENT: SHEOL:

In the Septuagint Hades is the standing equivalent for Sheol, but also translates other terms associated with death and the state after it. The Greek conception of Hades was that of a locality receiving into itself all the dead, but divided into two regions, one a place of torment, the other of blessedness. This conception should not be rashly transferred to the New Testament, for the latter stands not under the influence of Greek pagan belief, but gives a teaching and reflects a belief which model their idea of Hades upon the Old Testament through the Septuagint. The Old Testament Sheol, while formally resembling the Greek Hades in that it is the common receptacle of all the dead, differs from it, on the one hand, by the absence of a clearly defined division into two parts, and, on the other hand, by the emphasis placed on its association with death and the grave as abnormal facts following in the wake of sin. The Old Testament thus concentrates the partial light it throws on the state after death on the negative, undesirable side of the prospect apart from redemption. When in the progress of Old Testament revelation the state after death begins to assume more definite features, and becomes more sharply differentiated in dependence on the religious and moral issue of the present life this is not accomplished in the canonical writings (otherwise in the apocalyptic literature) by dividing Sheol into two compartments, but by holding forth to the righteous the promise of deliverance from Sheol, so that the latter becomes more definitely outlined as a place of evil and punishment.

2. IN THE NEW TESTAMENT: HADES:

The New Testament passages mark a distinct stage in this process, and there is, accordingly, a true basis in Scripture for the identification in a certain aspect of Sheol — Hades — with hell as reflected in the King James Version. The theory according to which Hades is still in the New Testament the undifferentiated provisional abode of all the dead until the day of judgment, with the possibility of ultimate salvation even for those of its inmates who have not been saved in this life, is neither in harmony with the above development nor borne out by the facts of New Testament usage. That dead believers abide in a local Hades cannot be proven from 1 Thessalonians 4:16; 1 Corinthians 15:23, for these passages refer to the grave and the body, not to a gathering-place of the dead. On the other hand Luke 23:43; 2 Corinthians 5:6-8; Philippians 1:23; Revelation 6:9; 7:9 ff; 15:2 ff teach that the abode of believers immediately after death is with Christ and God.

3. ACTS 2:27,31:

It is, of course, a different matter, when Hades, as not infrequently already the Old Testament Sheol, designates not the place of the dead but the state of death or disembodied existence. In this sense even the soul of Jesus was in Hades according’ to Peter’s statement ( Acts 2:27,31 — on the basis of Psalm 16:10). Here the abstract sense is determined by the parallel expression, “to see corruption” None the less from a comparatively early date this passage has been quoted in support of the doctrine of a local descent of Christ into Hades.

4. REVELATION 20:13; 6:8; 1:18:

The same abstract meaning is indicated for Revelation 20:13. Death and Hades are here represented as delivering up the dead on the eve of the final judgment. If this is more than a poetic duplication of terms, Hades will stand for the personified state of death, Death for the personified cause of this state. The personification appears plainly from 20:14: “Death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire.” In the number of these “dead” delivered up by Hades, believers are included, because, even on the chiliastic interpretation of 20:4-6, not all the saints share in the first resurrection, but only those “beheaded for the testimony of Jesus, and for the word of God,” i.e. the martyrs. A similar personifying combination of Death and Hades occurs in Revelation 6:8 (“a pale horse: and he that sat upon him his name was Death; and Hades followed with him”). In Revelation 1:18, on the other hand, Death and Hades are represented as prisons from which Christ, in virtue of His own resurrection, has the power to deliver, a representation which again implies that in some, not necessarily local, sense believers also are kept in Hades.

5. LUKE 16:23:

In distinction from these passages when the abstract meaning prevails and the local conception is in abeyance, the remaining references are more or less locally conceived. Of these Luke 16:23 is the only one which might seem to teach that recipients of salvation enter after death into Hades as a place of abode. It has been held that Hades is here the comprehensive designation of the locality where the dead reside, and is divided into two regions, “the bosom of Abraham” and the place of torment, a representation for which Jewish parallels can be quoted, aside from its resemblance to the Greek bisection of Hades. Against this view, however, it may be urged, that if “the bosom of Abraham” were conceived as one of the two divisions of Hades, the other division would have been named with equal concreteness in connection with Dives. In point of fact, the distinction is not between “the bosom of Abraham” and another place, as both included in Hades, but between “the bosom of Abraham” and Hades as antithetical and exclusive. The very form of the description of the experience of Dives: “In Hades he lifted up his eyes, being in torments,” leads us to associate Hades as such with pain and punishment. The passage, therefore, does not prove that the saved are after death in Hades.

In further estimating its bearing upon the problem of the local conditions of the disembodied life after death, the parabolic character of the representation must be taken into account. The parable is certainly not intended to give us topographical information about the realm of the dead, although it presupposes that there is a distinct place of abode for the righteous and wicked respectively.

6. MATTHEW 11:23:

The two other passages where Hades occurs in the teaching of our Lord ( Matthew 11:23 parallel Luke 10:15; and Matthew 16:18) make a metaphorical use of the conception, which, however, is based on the local sense. In the former utterance it is predicted of Capernaum that it shall in punishment for its unbelief “go down unto Hades.” As in the Old Testament Sheol is a figure for the greatest depths known ( Deuteronomy 32:22; Isaiah 7:11; 57:9; Job 11:8; 26:6), this seems to be a figure for the extreme of humiliation to which that city was to be reduced in the course of history. It is true, 11:24, with its mention of the day of judgment, might seem to favor an eschatological reference to the ultimate doom of the unbelieving inhabitants, but the usual restriction of Hades to the punishment of the intermediate state (see below) is against this.

7. MATTHEW 16:18:

In the other passage, Matthew 16:18, Jesus declares that the gates of Hades shall not katischuein the church He intends to build. The verb katischuein may be rendered, “to overpower” or “to surpass.” If the former be adopted, the figure implied is that of Hades as a stronghold of the power of evil or death from which warriors stream forth to assail the church as the realm of life. On the other rendering there is no reference to any conflict between Hades and the church, the point of comparison being merely the strength of the church, the gates of Hades, i.e. the realm of death, serving in common parlance as a figure of the greatest conceivable strength, because they never allow to escape what has once entered through them.

The above survey of the passages tends to show that Hades, where it is locally conceived, is not a provisional receptacle for all the dead, but plainly associated with the punishment of the wicked. Where it comes under consideration for the righteous there is nothing to indicate a local sense. On 1 Peter 3:19; 4:6 (where, however, the word “Hades” does not occur), see articles ESCHATOLOGY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT; SPIRITS IN PRISON .

8. NOT A FINAL STATE:

The element of truth in theory of the provisional character of Hades lies in this, that the New Testament never employs it in connection with the final state of punishment, as subsequent to the last judgment. For this GEHENNA (which see) and other terms are used. Dives is represented as being in Hades immediately after his death and while his brethren are still in this present life. Whether the implied differentiation between stages of punishment, depending obviously on the difference between the disembodied and reembodied state of the lost, also carries with itself a distinction between two places of punishment, in other words whether Hades and Gehenna are locally distinct, the evidence is scarcely sufficient to determine. The New Testament places the emphasis on the eschatological developments at the end, and leaves many things connected with the intermediate state in darkness. Geerhardus Vos HADID ([ dydij; , chadhidh ]): A city in Benjamin ( Nehemiah 11:33 f) named with Lod and Ono ( Ezra 2:33; Nehemiah 7:37), probably identical with Adida Septuagint [ Jadida>, Hadida ]) of 1 Macc 12:38; 13:13, “over against the plain,” which was fortified by Simon Maccabeus.

It is represented by the modern el-Chaditheh, about 3 miles Northeast of Lydda.

HADLAI , ([ yl;d]j” , chadhlay ], “resting”): An Ephraimite ( 2 Chronicles 28:12), father of Amasa, who was one of the heads of the tribe in the time of Pekah, king of Israel.

HADORAM ([ µr;doh\ , hadhoram ]): (1) Son of Joktan and apparently 6th in descent from Noah ( Genesis 10:27 parallel 1 Chronicles 1:21). (2) Son of Tou, king of Hamath, sent by his father with presents to King David ( 1 Chronicles 18:10). In 2 Samuel 8:9,10, written probably incorrectly “Joram,” “son of Toi.” (3) Rehoboam’s superintendent of the forced labor department ( Chronicles 10:18), called Adoram 1 Kings 12:18, a contraction of ADONIRAM (which see). He was sent by Rehoboam as messenger to Israel at the time of the revolt of the ten tribes and was stoned to death by them. George Rice Hovey HADRACH , ([ Ër;d]j” , chadhrakh ]): “The land of Hadrach” is mentioned only once in Scripture (Zec 9:1), and there it is grouped with Damascus, Hamath, Tyre and Sidon. It may be safely identified with the “Hatarikka” of the Assyrian inscriptions, against which Assur-dan III made expeditions in his 1st (772 BC), 8th and 18th years. It also appears in inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III. They place it in the North of Lebanon.

HAGAB ([ bg;j; , chaghabh ], “locust”): Ancestor of some of the Nethinim who returned from the Babylonian captivity with Zerubbabel and Nehemiah. The name occurs second after Hagabah in Ezra 2:46, but is omitted entirely from the parallel list of Nehemiah 7:48.

HAGABA , ([ ab;g;j\ , chaghabha’ ]): Same as the following ( Nehemiah 7:48).

HAGABAH , ([ hb;g;j\ , chaghabhah ], “locust”): Like Hagab, an ancestor of some of the Nethinim who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel ( Ezra 2:45); spelled Hagaba in the parallel passage ( Nehemiah 7:48).

HAGAR ([ rg;j; , haghar ], “emigration,” “flight”; [ JAga>r, Hagar ], [ ]Agar, Agar ]): An Egyptian woman, the handmaid or slave of Sarai; a present, perhaps, from Pharaoh when Abram dissembled to him in Egypt ( Genesis 12:16). Mention is made of her in two passages ( Genesis 16; 21:8-21).

1. THE SCORNFUL HANDMAID AND HER FLIGHT:

In the first narrative ( Genesis 16) it is related that Sarai, despairing at her age of having children, gave Hagar to Abram as a concubine. As Hagar was not an ordinary household slave but the peculiar property of her mistress (compare Genesis 29:24,29), any offspring which she might bear to Abram would be reckoned as Sarai’s (compare Genesis 30:3-9).

In the prospect of becoming a mother, Hagar, forgetting her position, seems to have assumed an insolent bearing toward her childless mistress.

Sarai felt keenly the contempt shown her by her handmaid, and in angry tones brought her conduct before Abram. Now that her plan was not working out smoothly, she unfairly blamed her husband for what originated with herself, and appealed to Heaven to redress her grievance. Abram refused to interfere in the domestic quarrel, and renouncing his rights over his concubine, and her claims on him, put her entirely at Sarai’s disposal.

Under the harsh treatment of her mistress Hagar’s life became intolerable, and she fled into the wilderness, turning her steps naturally toward Egypt, her native land.

2. HER VISION AND RETURN:

But the angel of Yahweh (who is here introduced for the first time as the medium of theophany) appeared to her as she was resting by a spring and commanded her to return and submit herself to her mistress, promising her an innumerable seed through her unborn son, concerning whom he uttered a striking prediction (see ISHMAEL ). To the angel (who is now said to be Yahweh Himself) Hagar gave the name “Thou art a God of seeing” (the Revised Version (British and American) “that seeth”), for she said, “Have I even here (in the desert where God, whose manifestations were supposed to be confined to particular places, might not be expected to reveal Himself) looked after him that seeth me?” — the meaning being that while God saw her, it was only while the all-seeing God in the person of His angel was departing that she became conscious of His presence. The spring where the angel met with her was called in Hebrew tradition Be’er-lachayro’i, “the well of the living one who seeth me” (Revised Version, margin).

Obedient to the heavenly vision Hagar returned, as the narrative implies, to her mistress and gave birth to Ishmael, Abram being then eighty-six years old.

The idea in 30:13 is not very clearly expressed. The word translated “here” generally means “hither,” and there is no explanation of the “living one” in the name of the well. It has therefore been proposed to emend the Hebrew text and read “Have I even seen God, and lived after my seeing?” — an allusion to the belief that no one could “see God and live” (compare Genesis 32:30; Exodus 33:20). But there are difficulties in the way of accepting this emendation. The name of God, “a God of seeing,” would require to be interpreted in an objective sense as “a God who is seen,” and the consequent name of the well, “He that seeth me liveth,” would make God, not Hagar, as in 30:13, the speaker.

3. HER HARSH EXPULSION AND DIVINE HELP:

The other narrative ( Genesis 21:8-21) relates what occurred in connection with the weaning of Isaac. The presence and conduct of Ishmael during the family feast held on the occasion roused the anger and jealousy of Sarah who, fearing that Ishmael would share the inheritance with Isaac, peremptorily demanded the expulsion of the slave-mother and her son. But the instincts of Abraham’s fatherly heart recoiled from such a cruel course, and it was only after the revelation was made to him that the ejection of Hagar and her son would be in the line of the Divine purpose — for Isaac was his real seed, while Ishmael would be made a nation too — that he was led to forego his natural feelings and accede to Sarah’s demand. So next morning the bondwoman and her son were sent forth with the bare provision of bread and a skin of water into the wilderness of Beersheba. When the water was spent, Hagar, unable to bear the sight of her boy dying from thirst, laid him under a shrub and withdrew the distance of a bowshot to weep out her sorrow. But the angel of God, calling to her out of heaven, comforted her with the assurance that God had heard the voice of the lad and that there was a great future before him. Then her eyes were opened to discover a well of water from which she filled the skin and gave her son to drink. With God’s blessing the lad grew up amid the desert’s hardships, distinguished for his skill with the bow. He made his home in the wilderness of Paran, and his mother took a wife for him out of her own country.

4. PRACTICAL LESSONS FROM THE HISTORY:

The life and experience of Hagar teach, among other truths, the temptations incident to a new position; the foolishness of hasty action in times of trial and difficulty; the care exercised over the lonely by the allseeing God; the Divine purpose in the life of everyone, however obscure and friendless; how God works out His gracious purposes by seemingly harsh methods; and the strength, comfort and encouragement that ever accompany the hardest experiences of His children.

5. CRITICAL POINTS IN THE DOCUMENTS:

Genesis 16 belongs to the Jahwist, J, (except 16:1a,3,15 f which are from P), and 21:8-21 to East. From the nature of the variations in the narratives many critics hold that we have here two different accounts of the same incident. But the narratives as they stand seem to be quite distinct, the one referring to Hagar’s flight before the birth of Ishmael, and the other to her expulsion at the weaning of Isaac. It is said, however, that Elohist (E) represents Ishmael as a child “playing” (The Revised Veersion, margin, Septuagint [pai>zonta, paizonta ]) with Isaac at the weaning festival, and young enough to be carried by his mother and “cast” under a shrub; while according to the Priestly Code, the Priestly Code (P), ( Genesis 16:16; 21:5), as a child was weaned at the age of two or three years, he would be a lad of sixteen at that time. The argument for the double narrative here does not seem conclusive. The word metsacheq (16:9) does not necessarily mean “playing” when used absolutely; it is so used in Genesis 19:14, evidently in the sense of “mocking” or “jesting,” and Delitzsch gives it that meaning there. Then as to 19:14, the Massoretic Text does not state that the child was put on her shoulder, although the Septuagint does; nor does “cast” (19:15) so “clearly imply” that Ishmael was an infant carried by his mother (compare Matthew 15:30). It may be added that the words yeledh and na`ar, translated “child” and “lad” respectively, determine nothing as to age, as they are each used elsewhere in both senses.

6. ALLEGORICAL USE OF THE STORY BY PAUL:

In Galatians 4:21 ff Paul makes an allegorical use of this episode in the history of Ishmael and Isaac to support his argument for the transitory character of the Jewish ritual and the final triumph of Christian freedom over all Judaizing tendencies. In elaborating his reference, the apostle institutes a series of contrasts. Hagar, the bondwoman, represents the old covenant which was given from Mt. Sinai; and as Ishmael was Abraham’s son after the flesh, so the Judaizing Christians, who wish to remain in bondage to the law, are Hagar’s children. On the other hand, Sarah, the freewoman, represents the new covenant instituted by Christ; and as Isaac was born to Abraham in virtue of the promise, so the Christians who have freed themselves entirely from the law of carnal ordinances and live by faith are Sarah’s children. Thus Hagar corresponds to “the Jerusalem that now is,” that is, the Jewish state which is in spiritual bondage with her children; while Sarah represents “the Jerusalem that is above,” “our mother” (Revised Version (British and American)), the mother of us Christians, that free spiritual city to which Christians even now belong ( Philippians 3:20). By this allegory the apostle would warn the Galatian Christians of the danger which beset them from their Judaizing brethren, of their subjection to the covenant of works and their ultimate expulsion from the household of faith.

To us Paul’s reference does not appeal with the same force as it would do to those to whom he was writing. The incident taken by itself, indeed, does not contain any suggestion of such a hidden meaning. Yet the history of the Hebrew nation is but typical of the history of the church in all ages, and the apostle’s familiarity with rabbinical modes of interpretation may have led him to adopt this method of confirming the truth which he had already proved from the law itself.

For a discussion of the text and interpretation of Galatians 4:25a, “Now this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia,” and an account of Philo’s allegory of Hagar and Sarah, see Lightfoot’s notes at the end of chapter iv in his Commentary on Gal. James Crichton HAGARENES; HAGARITES , . See HAGRITES.

HAGERITE ([ yrig]h” , haghri ]). See HAGRITES.

HAGGADA See TALMUD.

HAGGAI , ([ yG”j” , chaggay ], an adjective formed from [ gj” , chagh ], “feast”):

1. NAME:

The word “Haggai” may mean “festal,” the prophet having been born perhaps on a festival day; compare the Roman name “Festus.” Hebrew proper names were sometimes formed in this manner, e.g. Barzillai, “a man of iron,” from barzel, “iron.” Haggai may, however, be a shortened form of Haggiah ( 1 Chronicles 6:30), meaning “festival of Yahweh,” as Mattenai is an abbreviation of Mattaniah ( Ezra 10:33,16). In Greek [ JAggai~ov, Haggaios ], in Latin, Aggaeus or Aggeus, sometimes Haggaeus.

Haggai is the 10th in the order of the Twelve Prophets.

2. PERSONAL HISTORY:

Little is really known of his personal history. But we do know that he lived soon after the captivity, being the first of the prophets of the Restoration.

From Haggai 2:3 of his prophecies it is inferred by many that he had seen the first temple, which, as we know, was destroyed in 586 BC. If so, he must have prophesied when a comparatively old man, for we know the exact date of his prophecies, 520 BC. According to Ezra 5:1; 6:14, he was a contemporary of Zechariah, and was associated with him in the work of rebuilding the temple; besides, in the Greek and Latin and Syriac VSS, his name stands with Zechariah’s at the head of certain psalms, e.g. Psalm 111 (112), in the Vulgate (Jerome’s Latin Bible, 390-405 A.D.) alone; Psalms 125; 126, in the Peshitta alone; Psalm 137, in the Septuagint alone; Psalms 146; 147; 148, in Septuagint and Peshitta; and Psalm 145, in Septuagint, Peshitta and Vulgate; perhaps these psalms were introduced into the temple-service on their recommendation. He was a prophet of great faith (compare 2:1-5); it is possible that he was a priest also (compare 2:10-19). Like Malachi he bears the name of “Yahweh’s messenger” (Heg 1:13; compare Malachi 3:1). According to Jewish tradition, he was a member of the Great Synagogue.

3. WORK:

Haggai’s work was intensely practical and important. Yahweh employed him to awaken the conscience and stimulate the enthusiasm of his compatriots in the rebuilding of the temple. “No prophet ever appeared at a more critical juncture in the history of the people, and, it may be added, no prophet was more successful” (Marcus Dods). Zechariah assisted him (compare Haggai 1:1; Zec 1:1).

4. PERIOD AND CIRCUMSTANCES:

Haggai’s prophecies, like Ezekiel’s, are dated “in the second year of Darius” ( Haggai 1:1; 2:10), i.e. 520 BC. The Jews, 42,360 strong ( Ezra 2:64), had returned from Babylon 16 years before (536 BC), under the leadership of Zerubbabel, the civil head of the community, and Joshua, the ecclesiastical. The generous edict of Cyrus had made return possible (compare Ezra 1:1-4). The new colonists had settled in Jerusalem and in the neighboring towns of Bethlehem, Bethel, Anathoth, Gibeon, Kiriath-jearim, and others adjacent ( Ezra 2:20 ff). Eager to reestablish the public worship of the sanctuary, they set about at once to erect the altar of burnt offering upon its old site ( Ezra 3:2,3; compare Haggai 2:14). Plans were also made for the immediate rebuilding of the temple, and the foundation stone was actually laid in the 2nd month of the 2nd year of the return ( Ezra 3:8-10), but the work was suddenly interrupted by the jealous, half-caste, semi-pagan Samaritans, descendants of the foreign colonists introduced into Samaria in 722 BC (compare Kings 17:24-41), whose offer to cooperate had been refused ( Ezra 4:1- 5,24). For 16 years thereafter nothing was done toward rearing the superstructure ( Ezra 4:5,24; 5:16); indeed, the Jews became indifferent, and began to build for themselves “ceiled houses” ( Haggai 1:4). (W. H.

Kosters has attempted to show that there was no return under Cyrus, and that Haggai and Zechariah, who never allude to any return, but rather look upon the return as still in the future (compare Zec 2:6,7), preached to the Jews who remained in Jerusalem, never having been carried by Nebuchadnezzar into captivity in 586 BC. But this theory is opposed by too many converging lines of Scriptural statement to warrant serious credence.) With the accession of Darius Hystaspes (i.e. Darius, the son of Hystaspes), the tide turned. Darius was a true successor to Cyrus, and favored religious freedom. Through the influence of the prophets Haggai and Zechariah, the people were roused from their lethargy, and the work of rebuilding was resumed with energy in 520 BC ( Haggai 1:14,15). The foundations were relaid ( Haggai 2:18). Four years later, in the 6th year of Darius, the whole structure was completed and dedicated ( Ezra 6:15). Meanwhile important events were taking place in the Persian empire. On the death (of Cambyses in 522 BC, the throne had been seized by a usurper, the so-called Pseudo-Smerdis. who held it, however, for some 7 months only. He was murdered by Darius, and the latter was elevated to the throne. But this gave other ambitious pretenders cause to rebel, and many provinces revolted, among them Susiana, Media, Assyria, Armenia, Parthia, and others (compare the famous Behistun inscription).

Altogether Darius fought 19 battles in putting down his rivals, and did not succeed in vanquishing all of his foes till the year after Haggai prophesied.

This accounts for the prophet’s repeated allusions to Yahweh’s “shaking” the nations (2:6,7,21,22). Haggai seems to regard the “shaking” of the nations as the precursor of the Messianic age. It was, therefore, important from the prophet’s point of view, that Yahweh’s temple should be made ready for the Messiah’s advent, that it might become the religious center of the world (compare Isaiah 2:2-4). The exact date of Haggai’s preaching was from September to December, 520 BC.

5. ANALYSIS:

Haggai’s prophecies are dated and therefore easily analyzed. They are composed of four distinct discourses, all four being delivered within months’ time in the year 520 BC: (1) Haggai 1, delivered on the 1st day of the 6th month (September), in which the prophet reproaches the people for their indifference to the work of rebuilding the temple, and warns them to consider their ways; assuring them that their procrastination was not due to want of means (1:4), and that God on account of their apathy was withholding the produce of the field (1:10). The effect of this appeal was that 24 days later, all the people, including Zerubbabel and Joshua, began the work of reconstruction (1:14,15). (2) Haggai 2:1-9, delivered on the 21st day of the 7th month (October), which was about one month after the work had been resumed, and containing a note of encouragement to those who felt that the new structure was destined to be so much inferior to Solomon’s temple. The prophet, on the contrary, assures them that the latter glory of the new house shall eclipse that of Solomon’s magnificent temple, for soon a great “shaking” on Yahweh’s part among the nations will usher in the Messianic age, and the precious things of all nations will flow in to beautify it (compare Hebrews 12:26-28). (3) Haggai 2:10-19, delivered on the 24th day of the 9th month (December) which was exactly 3 months after the building had been resumed, and containing, like the first discourse, a rebuke to the people because of their indifference and inertia. The discourse is couched in the form of a parable (2:11-14), by means of which the prophet explains why the prayers of the people go unanswered. It is because they have so long postponed the completion of the temple; a taint of guilt vitiates everything they do, and blasting and mildew and hail, and consequently unfruitful seasons, are the result. On the other hand, if they will but press forward with the work, Yahweh will again bless them, and fruitful seasons will follow their revived zeal (2:19; compare Zec 8:9-12). (4) Haggai 2:20-23, delivered on the 24th day of the 9th month, the very same day as that on which the discourse in 2:10-19 was delivered.

The sequence is immediate. For when Yahweh “shakes” the nations, He will establish Zerubbabel, the representative of the Davidic dynasty and the object of patriotic hopes. When the heathen powers are overthrown, Zerubbabel will stand unshaken as Yahweh’s honored and trusted vicegerent, and as the precious signet on Yahweh’s hand (compare Jeremiah 22:24; Song of Solomon 8:6).

6. MESSAGE:

The most striking feature in Haggai’s message is its repeated claim of Divine origin: 5 times in the 38 verses of his prophecies, he tells us that “the word of Yahweh came” unto him ( Haggai 1:1,3; 2:1,10,20); 4 t, also, he used the formula, “Thus saith Yahweh of hosts” (1:2,5,7; 2:11); times “saith Yahweh of hosts” (1:9; 2:6,7,9,23); and 4 times simply “saith Yahweh” (1:13; 2:4,14,17). Altogether he uses the exalted phrase “Yahweh of hosts” 14 t, besides 19 repetitions of the single but ineffable name “Yahweh.” The most striking sentence in all his prophecies is probably that found in 1:13, “Then spake Haggai, Yahweh’s messenger in Yahweh’s message unto the people.” His single purpose, as we have above seen, was to encourage the building of the temple. This he seems to have regarded as essential to the purity of Israel’s religion. His key-exhortation is “Consider your ways” (1:5:7; compare 2:15,18). His prophecies reflect the conditions of his age. He points to judgments as a proof of the Divine displeasure (1:9,10; 2:15-19). Unlike the earlier prophets, he does not denounce idolatry; but like his contemporary, Zechariah, and his successor, Malachi, he does lay stress on the external side of religion. Chief interest centers in the somewhat unusual parable contained in Haggai 2:10-19, which teaches that holiness is not contagious, but that evil is. “The faint aroma of sanctity coming from their altar and sacrifices was too feeble to pervade the secular atmosphere of their life” (A. B. Davidson, Exile and Restoration, 82). Haggai argues that Israel’s sacrifices for 16 years had been unclean in God’s sight, and had brought them no blessing, because they had left the temple in ruins; and, that while a healthy man cannot give his health to another by touching him, a sick man may easily spread contagion among all those about him. The thought is suggestive. Haggai may or may not have been a priest, “but in so short a prophecy this elaborate allusion to ritual is very significant.” Another very striking thought in Haggai’s book is his reference to Zerubbabel as Yahweh’s “servant” and “signet,” whom Yahweh has “chosen” (2:23). Wellhausen regards these words as an equivalent to making Zerubbabel the Messiah; but it is enough to think that the prophet is attempting only to restore him to the honorable position from which his grandfather, Jehoiachin, in Jeremiah 22:24, had been degraded. Thus would the prophet link Zerubbabel, the political hope of the post-exilic congregation, to the royal line of Judah. Isaiah speaks of Cyrus in similar terms without any Messianic implication ( Isaiah 44:28; 45:1). On the other hand, the implicit Messianic import of Haggai 2:7,8 is recognized on all sides.

7. STYLE:

Haggai’s style is suited to the contents of his prophecies. While he is less poetical than his predecessors, yet parallelism is not altogether wanting in his sentence ( Haggai 2:8). Compared with the greater books of prophecy, his brief message has been declared “plain and unadorned,” “tame and prosaic”; yet it must be acknowledged that he is not wanting in pathos when he reproves, or in force when he exhorts. Though he labors under a poverty of terms, and frequently repeats the same formulas, yet he was profoundly in earnest, and became the most successful in his purpose of all his class. He was especially fond of interrogation. At best we have only a summary, probably, of what he actually preached.

8. CRITICISM:

The critical questions involved in Haggai’s case are not serious: Haggai 2:5a, for example, is wanting in the Septuagint; to 2:14 the Septuagint adds from Amos 5:10; 2:17 is very similar to, and seems dependent on, Amos 4:9; 1:7b and 13, are rejected by some as later interpolations; while Klostermann and Marti hold that the book as a whole was not written by Haggai at all, but rather about his prophetic activity, a perfectly gratuitous assumption without any substantial proof in its favor.

LITERATURE.

Driver, New Century Bible, “The Minor Prophets,” II, 1906; LOT, 1909; G. A. Smith, Expositor’s Bible, “The Twelve Prophets,” II, 1898; E. B.

Pusey, The Minor Prophets, II, 1878; M. Dods, “Handbooks for Bible Classes,” Hag, Zec, Mal; J. Wellhausen, Die kleinen Propheten ubersetzt u. erklart, 1898; W. Nowack, Die kleinen Propheten ubersetzt u. erklart, 1905; K. Marti, Dodekapropheton erklart, 1904; H. G. Mitchell, ICC, 1912. George L. Robinson HAGGERI . See HAGRI.

HAGGI ([ yGij” , chaggi ], “festive”): The second son of Gad ( Genesis 46:16; Numbers 26:15). The latter refers to his descendants as Haggites, of whom nothing else is known.

HAGGIAH ([ hY;Gij” , chaggiyah ], “feast of Yah”): Named in Chronicles 6:30 as among the descendants of Levi.

HAGGITES . See HAGGI.

HAGGITH ([ tyGij” , chaggith ], “festal”): According to 2 Samuel 3:4; 1 Kings 1:5,11; 2:13; 1 Chronicles 3:2, the fifth wife of David and the mother of his fourth son, Adonijah. The latter was born in Hebron while David’s capital was there ( 2 Samuel 3:4,5).

HAGIA . See AGIA.

HAGIOGRAPHA . See BIBLE; CANON OF OLD TESTAMENT.

HAGRI ([ yrig]h” , haghri ], “wanderer”; the King James Version Haggeri): The father of Mibhar, one of the “mighty men” who rallied round David during his foreign wars. Mentioned only in 1 Chronicles 11:38, whose parallel passage, 2 Samuel 23:36, gives, instead, the name “Bani the Gadite.”

HAGRITES ([ µyaiyrig]h” , haghri’im ]): An Arab tribe, or confederation of tribes ( 1 Chronicles 5:10,19,20 the King James Version “Hagarites”; 1 Chronicles 27:31 the King James Version “Hagerite”; Psalm 83:6 “Hagarenes”), against which the Reubenites fought in the days of Saul. In Genesis 25:12-18 are recorded the descendants, “generations,” of Ishmael, “whom Hagar the Egyptian Sarah’s handmaid, bare unto Abraham.” Two, and possibly three, of these tribes, Jetur, Naphish and Kedemah (25:15), appear to be identical with the 3 tribes whom the Reubenites and the other Israelite tribes East of the Jordan conquered and dispossessed (1 Chronicles 5). The correspondence of names in Genesis and 1 Chronicles leaves little doubt that “Hagrite” is a generic term roughly synonymous with “Ishmaelite,” designating the irregular and shifting line of desert tribes stretching along the East and South of Palestine. Those “East of Gilead,” “Jetur, Naphish and Nodah,” were overcome by Reuben: “The Hagrites were delivered into their hand, and all that were with them. ....

And they took away their cattle .... they dwelt in their stead until the captivity” ( 1 Chronicles 5:20-22).

These along with other Arab tribes are mentioned in the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III (745-727 BC). Jetur gave his name to the Itureans of Roman times, who were famed soldiers dwelling in Anti-Libanus. Compare Curtis, Commentary on Chronicles; Skinner, “Gen,” ICC, in the place cited. Edward Mack HA-HIROTH . See PI-HAHIROTH.

HAI ([ y[“h” , ha-`ay ], “the heap”): Genesis 12:8; 13:3 the King James Version; the Revised Version (British and American) AI (which see).

HAIL (1) ([ dr;B; , baradh ]; [ca>laza, chalaza ]):

1. ITS OCCURRENCE:

Hail usually falls in the spring or summer during severe thunder storms.

Hailstones are made up of alternate layers of ice and snow, and sometimes reach considerable size, causing great damage by their fall. Upward currents of air carry up raindrops already formed to the colder regions above, where they freeze, and as they again pass through layers of cloud, their bulk increases until, too heavy to be carried by the current, they fall to the ground. Hailstorms, like thunder storms, occur in narrow belts a few miles in breadth and are of short duration. Almost without exception they occur in the daytime. If they take place before the time of harvest they do great damage to grain and fruit, and in extreme cases have injured property and endangered life.

2. IN SYRIA:

Hailstorms, while by no means common in Syria and Palestine, are not unusual and are of great severity. They occasionally take place in Egypt.

Within a few years hailstones of unusual size fell in Port Said, breaking thousands of windows.

3. BIBLICAL INSTANCES: (1) The plague of hail ( Exodus 9:23-24; Psalm 78:47), which was a local storm, as they usually are, falling on the Egyptians and not striking the children of Israel in Goshen. It was of great severity. “There was hail, and fire mingled with the hail, very grievous, such as had not been in all the land of Egypt since it became a nation” ( Exodus 9:24). It took place in January, for the barley “was in the ear, and the flax was in bloom” ( Exodus 9:31), and caused great damage. (2) After the battle with the Amorites at Gibeon, “Yahweh cast down great stones from heaven upon them unto Azekah, and they died: they were more who died with the hailstones than they whom the children of Israel slew with the sword” ( Joshua 10:11).

4. AS PUNISHMENT:

Hail is often spoken of as a means of punishing the wicked: “As a tempest of hail .... will he cast down” ( Isaiah 28:2); “The hail shall sweep away the refuge of lies” ( Isaiah 28:17); and as symbols of God’s anger: “I will rain .... great hailstones, fire, and brimstone” ( Ezekiel 38:22); “There shall be .... great hailstones in wrath to consume it” ( Ezekiel 13:13; compare Isaiah 30:30; Haggai 2:17; Revelation 8:7; 11:19; 16:21).

5. GOD’S POWER:

Yahweh’s power and wisdom are shown in controlling the hail: “Hast thou seen the treasuries of the hail?” ( Job 38:22); “Fire and hail, snow and vapor .... fulfilling his word” ( <19E808> Psalm 148:8). Alfred H. Joy HAIL (2) : Interjection, found only in the Gospels as the translation of [cai~re, chaire ], [cai>rete, chairete ], imp. of [cai>rw, chairo ], “to rejoice,” is used as a greeting or salutation. The word “Hail” is Old English and was formerly an adjective, used with the verb to be, meaning “well,” “sound,” “hale,” e.g. “Hale be thou.” Wycliff has “heil” without the verb, followed by other English VSS, except that the Geneva has “God save thee,” in Matthew 26:49; 28:9. The word occurs in Matthew 26:49; 27:29; 28:9, “all hail”; Mark 15:18; Luke 1:28; John 19:3. See GODSPEED; GREETING.

HAIR ([ r[;ce , se`ar ], [ r[“c” , sa`ar ], Aramaic [ r[“c] , se`ar ], and their derivatives; [qri>x, thrix ], gen. case [trico>v, trichos ], [ko>mh, kome ]):

1. HAIR FASHIONS:

Hair was worn in different fashions by the Orientals of Biblical times, and not always in the same way among the same people in different epochs. We know this clearly from Egyptian literature and monuments, as well as from the writings of Greek authors (especially Herodotus), that the dwellers on the Nile had their heads shaved in early