Commenting on Mal 4:4-6 (Heb 3:22-24),
Stephen Chapman wrote the following on this passage which might be of interest
to Latter-day Saints:
. . . the enigmatic
reference in Mal 3:24 [4:6] to the way in which Elijah will (lit.) ‘turn the
heart of fathers to [their] sons and the heart of sons to their fathers’
approximates the recognized Deuteronomic expression ‘to turn the heart’ (Deut
4:39; 30:1; 1 Kg 8:47 = 2 Chr 6:37. Cf. Isa 44:19; 46:18; Lam 3:21). The only
difference is that Mal 3:24 [4:6] uses the preposition על in contrast to the
more usual preposition אל, which may in this case indicate a transitive sense of the verb, or
simply the flexibility of late biblical Hebrew.
The presence of the
dueteronomistic idiom is sometimes obscured by translation. Thus, in Deut 4:39,
the Israelites are commanded by Moses to (lit). ‘know today and turn your heart
to [the fact that] the LORD is God in the heaven above and on the earth
beneath.’ Most significant perhaps is Deut 30:1-2, in which the expression ‘turn
your heart’ is followed by the importance of faithful ‘sons’ (Deut 30:2).
The citation in Deut
30:1 reveals the link between the idiom of ‘turning the heart’ and the central deuteronomistic the conception of repentance (‘returning,’ שׁוב). In deuteronomistic understanding, an aspect of
internal observance (expressed by לבב) forms the necessary precondition for living an
obedient life. According to Deut 30:1, this internal observance arises from the
existential comparison between later events (‘when all these things come upon
you’) and the word of God as revealed in the book of Deuteronomy itself (‘the
blessing and the curse, which I have set before you, and you take them to
heart among all the nations where the LORD your God has driven you’ [my
emphasis]). Thus, in deuteronomistic understanding repentance ultimately arises
from study of scripture.
While the Hebrew verb
used for renewed obedience (‘returning’) is almost always the same (שׁוב), the verb used to
indicate the internal observance varies. In Deut 30:1, it is the Hiph’il
form of the same verb (שׁוב, as in Mal 3:24 [4:6]) that is paired with the call to ‘return’ (שׁוב) in Deut 30:2.
However, in 1 Sam 7:3 the Hiph’il form of the verb כון is paralleled with שׁוב. In 2 Sam 19:15 [14]
the Hiph’il form of the verb נטה is used in combination with לבב and שׁוב. In Deut 29:17 [18]
and Deut 30:17, the Qal form of the verb פנה is used to denote internal movement of
the heart on which outward obedience is contingent (note the parallel occurrence
of שׁוב in Deut 30:10).
Moreover, a
constellation of further motifs also suggests a deuteronomistic tradition-historical
background for Mal 3:23-24 [4:5-6], with shared references to the way in which
God will ‘blot out the names’ of the unfaithful, the devastation which the land
will suffer on their account and to future generations of the faithful. In sum,
Mal 3:23-24 [4:5-6] summons Israel prophetically to repentance. Social
decay is but a symptom of a greater illness. The fundamental issue at hand is
Israel’s ‘vertical’ reconciliation with God, rather than any specific ‘horizontal’
social situation.
‘Horizontal’ interpretations
of the situation reflected in Mal 3:24 [4:6] (e.g., a Hellenistic ‘crisis
within the family’) are not very convincing. Nor does Blenkinsopp’s proposal of
an apocalyptic motif carry conviction, as we have seen. While a third proposal
is suggestive, namely, that this language of the ‘heart’ has its origins in
wisdom traditions, wisdom motifs do not otherwise appear to be prominent. Thus,
the likeliest possibility, based on the linguistic parallels with the book of
Deuteronomy which have been noted, is that the language of ‘father’ and ‘sons’
in Mal 3:24 [4:6] is also essentially deuteronomistic and covenantal, turning
on the worship of God rather than ‘other gods.’
Thus, within the
context of the deuteronomistic stream of tradition the references to Elijah in
Malachi (esp. Mal 3:23 [4:5]) serve to underscore the worship of God alone
rather than to valorize apocalyptic views. This particular theme is also a key
feature of the Elijah account in 1 Kg 17-21; for example, in 1 Kg 18:37-38
Elijah asks God to ‘turn the heart’ of the people back; in 1 Kg 18:39 the
people make confession to God in opposition to the prophets of Baal. The
reference in Mal 3:24 [4:6] to the ‘ban’ or ‘curse’ (חרם) is thus to be
expected as also part of the same constellation of covenantal motifs (cf. Deut
7:26).
As in the case of
Elijah, in deuteronomistic conception of prophets and prophecy the admonition of
‘return’ is central. Among the Latter Prophets, שׁוב appears quite prominently, particularly the
books of Jeremiah and Hosea. Variations on the theme provide a major rhetorical
structuring device in at least two different passages (Jer 3-4 and Am 4).
Deuteronomistic and deuteronomistic-style redactions consistently characterize
the pre-exilic prophets as ‘servants of God’ who preached precisely this kind
of repentance (e.g., 2 Kg 17:13; Jer 25:4-5; Zech 1:4; Neh 9:26).
Moreover, in the
Latter Prophets the violation of covenant also results in social disintegration
(e.g., Isa 3:3-4; Jer 9:1-5; Mic 7:1-7). This prophetic background is likely to
have been widely understood: R.A. Mason notes that the LXX adds ‘and the heart
of a man to his neighbor’ after Mal 3;24 [4:6], a phrase quite similar to Isa
3:5 (cf. Jer 19:9). Could the translators of the LXX have been reading Malachi
here in light of the book of Isaiah? At the very least, the closeness of this
language emphasizes the way in which covenant and prophecy, rather than
apocalyptic, provides the tradition-historical context for Mal 3:23-24 [4:5-6],
just as covenant and law frame the background of Mal 3:22 [4:4].
In sum, the
appendices in Mal 3:22-24 [4:4-6] thoroughly partake of deuteronomistic expressions
and concepts, ultimately depending on this association for their own
comprehensibility. The historical distance between the probable date of these
appendices (late 5th-4th B.C.?) and that of the ‘deuteronomistic movement’ (650-500
B.C.) may raise the question of precisely what is meant by ‘deuteronomism,’ but
it is nonetheless clear and significant that these appendices depend more
heavily on deuteronomistic traditions than any others. This dependence illuminates
the way in which these appendices initially functioned as examples of
canon-conscious redaction: closing Malachi as a discrete book against the backdrop
of an emergent deuteronomistic canon. (Stephen B. Chapman, The Law and the
Prophets: A Study in Old Testament Canon Formation [Grand Rapids, Mich.:
Baker Academic, 2020], 140-43)