Friday, September 25, 2020

Stephen B. Champman on Malachi 4:4-6 (Heb 3:22-24)

 

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)

 

Further Reading


Refuting the Tanners on the LDS Interpretation of Malachi 4:5-6


New Testament and Early Patristic Expectation of a Future Coming of Elijah


Robert Bellarmine on the Future Coming of Elijah