9. Thy bow was made quite naked] is made bare. The “bow” is the battle-bow. It is bared of its covering in order to be freely used and to discharge its arrows—a figure for the flashing thunderbolts, or for the missiles with which Jehovah smites the rivers and the sea.

According to the oaths of the tribes] The words down to Selah form a riddle which all the ingenuity of scholars has not been able to solve. Delitzsch calculates that a hundred translations of them have been offered. The clause no doubt carries on the previous one, “thy bow is made bare,” just as it is taken up by the following one, “thou cleavest the rivers (or, currents) into dryland.” What must be described therefore is the discharge from the naked bow of the shafts which smote the rivers. The word rendered “tribes” (which have nothing to do here) may mean staves (Habakkuk 3:14), i.e. spears or shafts. The term “oaths” might more naturally be some derivative of the word seven and mean sevens, heptads (so Ewald), sevens of spears, with the meaning that Jehovah’s shafts were discharged not singly but in sevens. There still remains the expression word (A. V. even thy word), which is difficult to connect with the preceding. The idea that Jehovah’s arrows are really His “word,” whereby He rebukes and cleaves the sea, is not very natural. The multiplication of conjectures would serve no purpose.

Thou didst cleave the earth with rivers] The language certainly admits of this sense, but the connexion seems rather to require: thou dost cleave the rivers (or, water-currents) into dryland. Both the words “rivers” and “earth” are in the accus.; and only the connexion can shew which is the direct object and which the more remote (acc. of result).

Verse 9. - The prophet continues his description of the Lord as "a man of war" (Exodus 15:3). Thy bow was made quite naked. The sheath of the bow was laid aside to make it ready for use. In the Assyrian monuments the bow case forms part of the quiver, and holds only the lower half of the bow (Rawlinson, 'Anc. Mon.,' 2:55, edit. 1864). It was fastened to the side of the chariot or carried at the back of the archer. (For the general sense, comp. Deuteronomy 32:40, etc.; Psalm 45:5.) In the Revelation (Revelation 6:2) he that sits on the white horse has a bow. According to the oaths of the tribes, even thy word; i.e. thou doest all this to confirm the promises of deliverance and salvation made to the tribes of Israel This sense is satisfactory; but the Hebrew text is corrupt, and cannot be explained with any certainty. The Revised Version gives," The oaths to the tribes were a sure word;" in the margin, "Sworn were the chastisements (Hebrew, 'rods') of thy word." Thus Dr. Briggs: "Sworn are the rods of thy word." Orelli translates," Oaths, rods of the word," and explains the clause to mean that the Lord comes to execute the denounced punishment, which proceeds from his mouth like chastising rods. The word mattoth is translated "tribes" (as in 2 Chronicles 5:2) or "rods." Keil contends for the latter, as instruments of chastisement, rendering," Rods are sworn by word" Henderson, taking the words as a military signal, curiously translates, "'Sevens of spears' was the word." Pusey supports the Authorized Version, which, indeed. gives a good sense, and is probably correct It is virtually supported by Jerome, who has, "Suscitans suscitabis arcum tuum, juramenta tribubus quae locutus es," "Thou wilt awaken the oaths," which, so long as the evil prospered, seemed to be forgotten and sleeping. The LXX. emits the word rendered "oaths," and translates mattoth, σκῆπτρα, thus: Ἐντείνων ἐνέτεινας τόξον σου ἐπὶ σκῆπτρα λέγει Κύριος, "Thou didst surely bend thy bow against sceptres." Selah. A pause ensues before the introduction of a new series of natural phenomena, accompanying the Lord's epiphany (see on ver. 3). The next clause would be more fitly joined with ver. 10. Thou didst cleave the earth with (or, into) rivers. This refers to some catastrophe like that which happened at the Flood, when "the fountains of the great deep were broken up" (Genesis 7:11; comp. Psalm 77:16). Others think that the allusion is to the miracles at the Red Sea, or Sinai, or Rephidim in the wilderness, as in Psalm 74; Psalm 78; Psalm 105. But though the prophet glances at such particular circumstances, his scope is more general. Habakkuk 3:9God has already made bare the bow, to shoot His arrows at the foe. תּעור, third pers. imperf. niph. of עוּר, equivalent to ערר (Isaiah 32:11), and the more usual ערה, to be naked. To strengthen the thought, the noun עריה is written before the verb instead of the inf. abs. (cf. Micah 1:11). The bow is made bare, not by the shooting of the arrows, but by its covering (γωρυτός, corytus) being removed, in order to use it as a weapon. The reference is to the bow used in war, which God carries as a warrior; so that we are not to think of the rainbow, even if the chariots might be understood as signifying the clouds, as in Isaiah 19:1 and Psalm 104:3, since the rainbow is a sign of peace and of the covenant, whereas God is represented as attacking His enemies. The next clause, שׁבעות מטּות אמר, is very obscure, and has not yet been satisfactorily explained. Of the two meanings which may be given to mattōth, viz., branches, rods, or staffs, and tribes of the people of Israel, the latter can hardly be thought of here, since mattōth would certainly have been defined by either a suffix or some determining clause, if the tribes of Israel were intended. On the other hand, the meaning staffs or sticks is very naturally suggested both by the context - viz. the allusion to the war-bow - and also by Habakkuk 3:14, where mattı̄m unquestionably signifies staves or lances. At the same time, the meaning spears or darts cannot be deduced from either Habakkuk 3:14 or 2 Samuel 18:14. In both passages the meaning staves, used as lances or weapons, is quite sufficient. Matteh, a stick or staff with which blows were struck, might stand, as an instrument of chastisement, for the punishment or chastisement itself (cf. Isaiah 9:3; Isaiah 10:5), and in Micah 6:9 it denotes the rod. שׁבעות may be either the plural construct of שׁבוּע, the seventh, the heptad, or the plural of שׁבוּעה, an oath, or the passive participle of שׁבע, to be sworn, like שׁבעי שׁבעות in Ezekiel 21:23. There is no material difference in the meaning obtained from the last two; and the view we take of the word אמר must decide between them and the first explanation. This word, which is peculiar to poetry, denotes a discourse or a word, and in Job 22:28 the affair, or the occasion, like דּבר. Here, at any rate, it signifies the address or word of God, as in Psalm 68:12; Psalm 77:9, and is either a genitive dependent upon mattōth or an adverbial accusative. The Masoretic pointing, according to which mattōth is separated from 'ōmer by tiphchah, and the latter joined to selâh by munach, is connected with the evidently false rabbinical rendering of selah as eternity (in sempiternum), and being decidedly erroneous, cannot be taken into consideration at all. But the interpretation of שׁבעות as the seventh, does not suit either of these two possible views of 'ōmer. We therefore prefer the second meaning, chastising rods or chastisements. אמר, however, cannot be a genitive dependent upon mattōth; since chastisements of speech would hardly stand for chastisements which God had spoken, but, according to the analogy of שׁבט פּיו in Isaiah 11:4, would point to chastisements consisting in words, and this does not agree with the present train of thought. 'Omer is rather an adverbial accusative, and belongs to שׁבעות, indicating the instrument or media employed in the swearing: sworn with the word or through the word, like חרבּך in Psalm 17:13 (for the use of the accusative to describe the substance or the instrumental medium of an action, see Ewald, 282, c).

Hence שׁבעות cannot be a noun, but must be a passive participle, sworn. The expression, "chastising rods (chastisements) are sworn through the word," points to the solemn oath with which God promised in Deuteronomy 32:40-42 to take vengeance upon His enemies, and avenge the blood of His servants: "For I lift up my hand to heaven, and say, As I live for ever, when I have sharpened my glittering sword, and my hand grasps for judgment, I will render vengeance to mine adversaries, and repay them that hate me. I will make mine arrows drunk with blood, and my sword will eat flesh; from the blood of the slain and the captives, from the hairy head of the enemy." That Habakkuk had in his mind this promise of the vengeance of God upon His enemies, which is strengthened by a solemn oath, is unmistakeably evident, if we compare בּרק חניתך in Habakkuk 3:11 with בּרק חרבּי in Deuteronomy 32:41, and observe the allusion in ראשׁ מבּית רשׁע and ראשׁ פּרזו in Habakkuk 3:13 and Habakkuk 3:14 to ראשׁ פּרעות אויב in Deuteronomy 32:42. From this promise the words of the prophet, which are so enigmatical in themselves, obtain the requisite light to render them intelligible. Gesenius (Thes. p. 877) has explained the prophet's words in a similar manner, jurejurando firmatae sunt castigationes promissae (the threatened rods, i.e., chastisements, are sworn), even without noticing the allusion to Deuteronomy 32:40. upon which these words are founded. Delitzsch was the first to call attention to the allusion to Deuteronomy 32:40.; but in his explanation, "the darts are sworn through his word of power (jurejurando adstricta sunt tela verbo tuo)," the swearing is taken in a sense which is foreign to Deuteronomy, and therefore conceals the connection with the original passage. Of the other explanations not one can be vindicated. The rabbinical view which we find in the Vulgate, juramenta tribubus quae locutus es, is overthrown by the fact that שׁבעות without a preposition cannot mean per, or ob, or juxta juramenta, as we should have to render it, and as Luther actually has rendered it in his version ("as Thou hadst sworn to the tribes"). Ewald's rendering, "sevenfold darts of the word," is precluded by the combination of ideas, "darts of the word," which is quite foreign to the context. According to our explanation, the passage does indeed form simply a parenthesis in the description of the judicial interposition of God, but it contains a very fitting thought, through which the description gains in emphasis. In the last clause of the verse the description is continued in the manner already begun, and the effect indicated, which is produced upon the world of nature by the judicial interposition of God: "Thou splittest the earth into rivers." בּקּע is construed with a double accusative, as in Zechariah 14:4. This may be understood either as signifying that the earth trembles at the wrath of the Judge, and rents arise in consequence, through which rivers of water burst forth from the deep, or so that at the quaking of the earth the sea pours its waves over the land and splits it into rivers. The following verses point to an earthquake through which the form of the earth's surface is changed.

Habakkuk 3:9 Interlinear
Habakkuk 3:9 Parallel Texts


Habakkuk 3:9 NIV
Habakkuk 3:9 NLT
Habakkuk 3:9 ESV
Habakkuk 3:9 NASB
Habakkuk 3:9 KJV

Habakkuk 3:9 Bible Apps
Habakkuk 3:9 Parallel
Habakkuk 3:9 Biblia Paralela
Habakkuk 3:9 Chinese Bible
Habakkuk 3:9 French Bible
Habakkuk 3:9 German Bible

Bible Hub