Читать книгу Malachi - Aaron Schart - Страница 12

From the point of view of form criticism, the Malachi document, apart from the superscription and the appendix in Mal 3:22–24 [4:4–6 ET], is a collection of so-called “disputation sequences” made up of “disputation speeches.” This form, moreover, exists here in a variant found only in the book of Malachi. In essence a disputation speech is an argumentative rejection of contrary opinions.¹¹ In order to simplify the presentation we will speak of the “prophet” as the one who utters the disputation speech; this person summarizes in his own words and from his own point of view the results of a disputation conducted in the name of Yhwh with some other group.

The basic form of the disputation speech The basic form of the disputation speech was defined by Egon Pfeiffer (1959).¹² According to him a disputation speech always contains three formal elements: first, a thesis containing a predicate about the nature of Yhwh; second, a countering question from the opponents that is quoted word for word; third, the prophet’s rebuttal.

The logic of the disputation speech It is not the purpose of the disputation sequence or speech to record the real course of a disputation or to quote the opponents’ exact words. Instead, it is about sketching the content of a disputation in such a way as to depict it from the prophet’s point of view. That is, in the prophet’s eyes, the disputation has already been decided by Yhwh: the opponents’ positions contradict Yhwh’s will. Thus the disputation speech looks back at the real disputation in which the prophet’s divine claims were still in dispute. This also explains why the prophet knows the opponents’ counterquestions and introduces them in qatal, as something that has already happened in the past (“You have said …”), because they were addressed to him in personal confrontation. The fact that such disputations on the oral level were problematic and, among other things, extended over longer periods of time may have formed the background for the talk of “wearying Yhwh with words” (Mal 2:17).

Although the prophet lays claim to Yhwh’s authority for his presentation of the results of the disputation, we may suppose that, even so, not all of the prophet’s opponents would have accepted the prophet’s opinion. The very fact that it appeared necessary to describe the disputation and thus to supply readers with divinely-legitimated strategies for argumentation against particular counterquestions favors the supposition that, despite their refutation by the prophet, those opposing questions had not been silenced but had even become more virulent. Since the prophet occasionally argues in terms of the future (e.g., Mal 3:5; 3:19 [4:1 ET]), it seems that the content of such arguments is still a matter for debate, something to be settled in the future. Hence the description of the disputation also serves the purpose of assigning to God’s future action the answer to the question of which party to the disputation is right. The unfulfilled nature of future hopes has been further emphasized by the redaction’s insertion of clear references to the “day of Yhwh” (e.g., Mal 3:23 [4:5 ET]). The community that transmitted the Malachi document lived in this condition, between present controversy and a longing for affirmation.

The pattern of the disputation sequence Within the Malachi document the disputation sequences follow a pattern that is not found elsewhere and therefore should be regarded as the creative achievement of the author.¹³

Thesis The disputation sequence begins with a thesis, thus formulating the starting point. Formally, this is either a divine self-proclamation (1:2; 1:6; 3:6; 3:13) or a prophetic speech (2:10; 2:17).

Quotation of the counter-position In a second step the prophet describes the opponents’ position. This takes the form of a counterquestion; the prophet introduces it with “but you have said …” in the form of a quotation.¹⁴ The counterquestions are directed to Yhwh when the thesis was formulated as divine speech. If, on the other hand, it took the form of prophetic speech the opponents’ answer is directed to the prophet.¹⁵ It is repeatedly made clear that the prophet is not quoting the opponents in their original words but instead lets his own evaluation enter into his formulation of the opponents’ words, for example by polemically distorting their position.

Refutation of the opponents’ position A third step produces a refutation of the counterquestion by means of a stacking of “arguments.” In this, the “disputation speech” proper, the prophet exhibits everything that could bring the opponents to insight: reproaches, references to the Torah and other traditional norms, examples and references to Yhwh’s future intervention. Once the prophet has presented his “arguments” the matter has been clarified in the name of Yhwh.

The Speaker The Malachi document produces the impression that all six disputation speeches are uttered by the same speaker, though on different occasions. The speaker’s words are, obviously, spoken in the name of Yhwh, a fact that is certified by the generic designation of the superscription, “word of Yhwh” (Mal 1:1, the use of the prophetic messenger formula, “thus says Yhwh” (Mal 1:4, and the formulae “says Yhwh of hosts” (20x) and “says Yhwh” (Mal 1:2bα; 3:13a).

Although in general the prophet relates to his conversation partners as one who speaks for Yhwh, there are three passages in which the prophet associates himself with the addressees as “we”: Mal 1:9a; 2:10; 2:17.¹⁶

The Addressees The superscription of the Malachi document suggests the idea that the prophet addresses all six disputation speeches “to Israel,” but in the text the hearers are, in part, more closely defined. In Mal 1:2, they are associated with Jacob and separated from Edom; in Mal 1:6b and 2:1 the hearers are addressed as “priests”; and in Mal 3:6 as “children” [lit. ‘sons’] of Jacob.” We may conclude from this that at least two different groups are addressed: on the one hand laypeople who identify with Jacob, and priests on the other hand. It is possible, though, that the words addressed to the laity are also intended for various groups. In particular, Mal 2:17 and 3:5 seem to address the victims of various forms of oppression, and Mal 3:13–21 [3:13–4:3 ET] is addressed to those who revere (or fear) Yhwh.

Authority of Scripture In his basic premise, the prophet offers a logical argumentation. But he mixes it with polemically biased “quotations” from the opponents, accuses them of having inferior motivations, and claims to have knowledge of the future consequences of an incriminated attitude. He frequently makes use of quotations and allusions to other writings that, to him, represent authority. These may also serve the purpose of achieving mutual understanding with the opponents: if the prophet can derive his position from authoritative texts his opponents may be more inclined to agree with him.

The search for texts the prophet presupposes has intensified in recent decades.¹⁷ In the process it has become clearer and clearer that, for the prophet, the Torah—that is, the collections of laws, including later parts of the Holiness Code—was normative. However, narrative materials such as the story of Jacob and Esau were also used. Besides these, the prophet adopts ideas from his prophetic predecessors. In Mal 3:23 [4:5 ET] the “prophet Elijah” is even referred to by name.