This study investigates the function of Malachi 3:22 in the context of prophetic eschatology as reflected in Malachi’s message about the delay of the expected Day of the Lord, which focuses on the charge to ‘remember the law of my servant Moses (…) I gave him at Horeb for all Israel’. This article examines the question how this charge serves the purpose of awaiting in the interim time the advent of the Day of the Lord. Firstly, a textual analysis is given of Malachi 3:22 in the context of the body of the book. Secondly, an eschatological application of the text is attempted with the help of selected texts from Deuteronomy 12:5, 11 (on worship) and 24:1–4 (on the treatment of women), addressing the problems in Malachi 1:6–2:9 and 2:10–16. Thirdly, the missional inferences of Malachi 3:22 for the present time are condensed in a postscript.
This article concurs with many scholars (Assis
Hence in the first section, Malachi 3:22 is textually analysed, answering the question of how to define the expressions used in the postexilic context of Malachi’s time. The next section focuses on the question of how the implementation of Malachi 3:22 might be envisioned in the context of spiritual decline and moral decay as described by Malachi. An eschatological application of Malachi 3:22 is attempted with the help of selected texts from Deuteronomy to address specific concerns in the early postexilic community. In a postscript, some remarks are made about the missional relevance of Malachi 3:22 for the present ecclesiastical praxis.
This article is a sequel to three previous ones (Wielenga
Firstly, some introductory remarks are made about the literary context of Malachi 3:22.
The Masoretic arrangement of Malachi 3:22–24 is retained here. Not only on historical but also on theological grounds, it seems better to posit Moses before Elijah, the Law before the Prophets.
No scholarly consensus has been reached about the question which source material has been used in the formulation of verse 22. It is common to point to Deuteronomic influences in view of its idiom: ‘to remember the law of my servant Moses, the degrees and laws I gave him at Horeb for all Israel’ (NIV).
Secondly, the socio-economic situation of the early postexilic Persian period in Yehud must be considered in the light of the bearing it has on the people’s response to the charge in verse 22.
Thirdly, the apparent delay in the fulfilment of the eschatological promises made by the prophet Haggai (2:6–9, 20–23) in 520
This spiritual condition could theologically be described as covenant infidelity. Two breaches of the covenant are raised in the bitter dialogues between the prophet and the people: the vertical and the horizontal breach, both threatening the coherence of the postexilic covenant community (Wielenga
Fourthly, pastorally in the confrontation between prophet and people, the anger of God with especially the priests (Ml 1:6–2:9) was persuasively proclaimed; however, the prophet was aiming at the penitential return to God and his law.
It is this community that is charged with remembering the law of Moses on its way into the future, awaiting the arrival of Elijah before the advent of the Day of the Lord.
The Hebrew text (MT) reads as follows: וּמִשְׁפָּטִֽים׃ חקִֻ֖יּם עַל־כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל בחְרב אותֹ֤ו צוִיִּ֨תיִ אֲשֶר עַבְדִ֑יּ משֹ֣הֶ תּוֹרַ֖ת זכִרְ֕וּ, rendered by the 2011 NIV-version used in this article as follows: ‘Remember the law of my servant Moses, the decrees and laws I gave him at Horeb for all Israel’ (Ml 4:4).
A preliminary remark is made about the nature of remembering in the nonliterate, oral culture of the ancient Near East.
The charge to remember the law of Moses calls Deuteronomy 4–11; 27–32 strongly to mind, where Moses time and again, admonishes Israel to remember and not to forget
The teaching of the law of Moses as part of the ministries of the temple staff, covenanted to God to perform that sacred duty (Ml 2:7), is also crucial in Malachi. Their failure to be faithful to this calling (Ml 2:8) led to the people ignoring the careful observance of the law of Moses (Assis
There is no scholarly consensus about the meaning of the expression ‘the law of Moses’ (Torath Mosheh). There is no need to sharply distinguish between the law of Moses as Pentateuch, as Deuteronomy or even more specifically as the Deuteronomic Code (Dt 12–26). There are good reasons to assume that the Pentateuch held an authoritative position in the postexilic era, and more specific in the post-Ezra period (Wielenga
This explains the character of the law of Moses: it is not so much a law code that is forced upon the people (Halberstam
The honorific title of ‘my servant’ for Moses, corresponds with the description of his high office in Deuteronomy: he is the sole mediator between God and Israel and God’s pre-eminent spokesman (Dt 9:7–29; 18:14–18; 34:5, 10–12; Watts
The law given at Horeb is described as ‘the decrees and laws’ (Dt 4:1; 5;1; 12:1).
The expression ‘all Israel’ also requires attention (Verhoef
In this section, the function of Malachi 3:22 in the eschatological discourse of the book is discussed without going into that discourse as such (Wielenga
As earlier pointed out, the two images of divine judgement on the day of the Lord are used in a pastoral rhetoric to call the covenant-breaking people of God to repentance and to return to the God of their fathers (Ml 1:2–5). Irrevocable as the final judgement on the ultimate Day of the Lord may be, at the same time, it is still avertable. The assumption here is that the coming of the ultimate Day of the Lord can be delayed, caused by the prophetic ministry of the messenger of the Lord (Ml 3:1a), identified with the Elijah to come (Ml 3:23).
The prophetic ministry mentioned in Malachi 3:23 entails the exhortation to remember the law of Moses. Calling the people back to a Torah-compliant life, formed part and parcel of the prophetic ministry that would find its pre-eminent spokesman in the prophet Elijah to come. The judgement on the Day of the Lord could only be expected to function as a refiner’s fire and not as a burning furnace, if the people, beginning with the temple staff, would return to the standards of the law of Moses. Malachi 3:23–24 creates the right theological frame for Malachi 3:22. The call to Torah-compliance did not function in a growing legalistic discourse with exclusivist Jewish overtones, but in an eschatological one, pastorally composed in a covenant-shaped frame of mind. In the present, defined by their redemptive past, they were called to await the advent of the Lord in the eschatological future (Ml 3:1) by remembering the law of Moses in the in-between time.
Because of space constraints, just two examples are given of how this active awaiting of the Day of the Lord, to arrive at an unspecified time in the future, might be envisioned. The situation in postexilic Yehud, as described in Malachi, requires immediate action on two fronts. As mentioned before, the worship of God in the temple by the spiritually depressed people was in disarray, while the unity of the covenant community was under threat by the growing practice of marrying outside the faith, increasing the number of ill-treated, divorced wives disproportionally and so threatening the coherence of the covenant people.
In this first section, the failing temple ministries (Ml 1:6–2:9) are reviewed with the help of the Deuteronomic teaching about the worship of God at the place chosen by him where his Name has been established and he really dwells among them (Dt 12:5, 11).
The dispute with the temple staff takes centre stage in Malachi, counting for 18 of the 55 verses that the book comprises (Snyman
The third commandment of the Decalogue (Ex 20:7; Dt 5:11) discloses how serious a transgression it was among Israel to injure the name of God, Yahweh (Houtman
But this covenantal name, connecting God with Israel (Dt 7:6), is associated here with the name Tsebaōth, referring most likely to the angelic hosts. This indicates that the God of Israel is not a tribal God, even though he reigned, in pre-exilic times from above the Ark of the covenant in the sanctuary (2 Sm 6:8). From there he reigned sovereignly over the universe. The addition of Tsebaōth to the name Yahweh conveys the message that Israel’s God is not like a tribal idol to be localised in one place only, and with its powers restricted to the territory of its worshippers.
Awaiting the Day of the Lord at an unspecified date in future history, required the temple staff to remember the law of Moses and to start with his instructions concerning the temple worship they were responsible for (Dt 12:5, 11).
There is no need or room to go into the discussions around Deuteronomy 12 (Arnold
The actual presence of God in the one chosen place is stressed. Yahweh Tsebaōth established his name there, indicating that he himself dwelled at the place chosen by him in his grace (McConville
Remembering the law of Moses in the religious context of Malachi meant that the temple staff had to become aware again that it was this God they were supposed to serve in the temple: Yahweh Tsebaōth who was near to them in his sovereignty and grace through the teaching ministries they were neglecting. They had to become cognisant as well that neglecting the altar ministries would endanger the temple and its staff (Ml 2:3; 3:3). Consequently, it would also inaugurate the beginning of the end for all the people (Ml 3:19).
One should remember that Yahweh Tsebaōth, in the postexilic era, had again invested his name in the reconstructed temple (Hag 1:5–9) and that from there, in the eschatological future, peace would spread out over the world (Hag 2:9, 22).
In the present climate of depressed spirituality and apathetic worship, the call to appear in the presence of Yahweh Tsebaōth with joy (Dt 12:7, 12, 18), should bring home to the temple staff the serious shortcomings of their ministries (Ml 1:7–8; Dt 15:21), quashing any hope of joy any pilgrim might still have cherished on his way to seek the face of the Lord (Dt 12:5; 28:47). The joy of worship (Braulik
The joy of worship was also supposed to find expression in the way daily life was lived and the state was organised in the land where Yahweh Tsebaōth was King.
Remembering Deuteronomy 12 in the interim, would give direction to the people going into the future pending the advent of the Day of the Lord.
Lastly, the anti-Canaanite context of Deuteronomy 12 is decisive for understanding its message (Arnold
In the postexilic period, the remnant population was called to worship God at the reconstructed temple in Jerusalem. This was contested by the Samaritans who claimed Mount Gerizim as the true place of worship of God.
Remembering the law of Moses in Deuteronomy 12 includes awareness of the strongly ‘countercultural’ worship that was asked for to give direction to the postexilic society in the in-between time that lay ahead.
Because of space constraints, the second example of remembering the law of Moses in the in-between time is briefly examined: the treatment of women according to Deuteronomy 24:1–4 where, at first glance, the issue of divorce and remarriage looks to be raised (Josberger
This section is united with the previous one through the theological concept of the covenant: firstly, the covenant with Levi (Ml 2:4) is broken by the priests, and now the covenant with the ancestors (Ml 2:10) is broken by men marrying outside the faith (Glazier-McDonald
The covenant with the ancestors, most likely the one concluded at Horeb (Snyman
The well-known covenant sanctions (Dt 28–30; Lv 26) are here alluded to as well: the excommunication from the tents of Jacob of the men marrying outside the faith, and who were already experiencing God’s displeasure with them (Ml 2:12–13). Possibly, one finds here an allusion to Genesis 31:33–34 (Snyman
Hence, the practice of marrying outside the faith with divorce as facilitating agency, was disqualified here as a covenant-breaking practice, introducing syncretism and so desecrating the temple and defiling the name of God, decried as a detestable thing to do (Ml 2:11).
As indicated earlier, the focus is now on the divorce practice, instigated by the husbands (as usual in the patricentric [Josberger
Not without good reason (Gn 1:26–28; 2:20–23), the wife is called ‘your partner’ or companion, pointing to equality and not submissiveness in the spousal relationship (Snyman
Leaving a wife of long-standing for another one meant breaking up the marriage covenant, referring to the legal basis of a marriage contract with all what that involved.
The reference to ‘covering his garment with violence’ (Ml 2:16), implicates the husband as the instigator of the process that did injustice to his wife of many years and left her, at least psychologically, hurt and him with a stained reputation (cf. Snyman
The casus raised in this section is complicated: a husband wanted to remarry his first wife after having divorced her some time ago. She was available again after her second marriage had ended in divorce or by the death of her husband. The cumbersome introduction to stating the casus (Dt 24:4) makes it look like an intentionally constructed case study (De Jong
It is not about divorce or remarriage as such: the woman was divorced (maybe even twice) and did remarry (Dt 24:2–3). What is detestable in the eyes of the Lord and would defile his land, is the intention of the first husband to remarry the wife he had previously divorced. The detestable thing about it is that he first divorced her because of his displeasure with her after having found something indecent about her (Dt 24:1), and now, as if nothing had happened before, nothing untoward is there to prevent this remarriage to her. Hence, the vagueness about the indecency (Dt 24:1) could be intentional and used as a rhetorical device to put the husband on the spot as the one violating the rights of his wife who had to be protected against him. The need to obtain an official certificate of divorce could also be regarded as protecting the wife against an unrestrained, male dominated divorce practice. The expression ‘after she has been defiled’ (Dt 24:4) could be interpreted with Josberger (
The point the men in Malachi’s time had to remember from Deuteronomy 24:1–4, was that their wives had rights which had to be protected. As husbands, they were called by God through the law of Moses to treat their wives as partners in the marriage covenant, but in God’s covenant with ‘all Israel’ as well. Awaiting the advent of the Lord to his temple, preceded by the prophet Elijah (Ml 3:1, 23), could only be done with assurance together as men and women, and in marriages that were pleasing in the eyes of Yahweh Tsebaōth who protects the vulnerable.
A missional reading of Malachi 3:22 should pay attention to a New Testament application of the text and its message and account for the missional hermeneutics employed.
The following missional inferences, at least, could be drawn from the text as analysed in this article.
Firstly, compliance with the law of Moses, giving direction to a God-pleasing life in the in-between time before the advent of the Day of the Lord, is sustained in the temple. The altar and teaching ministries during joyful worship services were intended to spiritually re-energise and redirect the people reconciled with God through the sacrificial office, for their public and private daily lives, enabling them to fulfil their God-given mandate in the land (Gn 12:3; Ex 19:4–6; Dt 4:6–8; Isa 49:6; Hag 2:6–9). This mandate could be described with the missiological term ‘centripetal mission’, intended to attract the nations to the temple in Jerusalem, where Yahweh Tsebaōth dwelled.
Secondly, the anti-Canaanite character of the temple worship had to be translated in public and private life in compliance with the law of Moses. In modern parlance, one could speak here of a ‘countercultural’ way of life (Wielenga
Thirdly, the gracious prolongation of time before the advent of the ultimate Day of the Lord create space for the people to return to God and his law, thereby averting the coming Day as a burning furnace. In the New Testament, this teaching is continued in the sayings about the delay of the Parousia (Mk 13:10; Mt 24:14) that serves the same purpose (Wielenga
The author declares that he has no financial or personal relationship(s) which may have inappropriately influenced him in writing this article.
See Stromberg (
For the link between Malachi 3:22–24 and the tripartite canon structure of Pentateuch (Moses), former and Later Prophets (Elijah) and writings (Ps 1), see Snyman (
For prophetic eschatology, see Gowan (
For the methodology used in this article, see Wielenga (
See for the discussion Assis (
In the body of the book, Deuteronomic influences can be traced; for example the impact of Deuteronomy 28–30 on the judgement pronouncement in Malachi 2:8, 12; 3:10–11. In Malachi’s precursor in the Book of the Twelve, Joel, the Deuteronomic influence can also be noted (Wielenga
For inter alia, see ‘Horeb’ (also in Ex 3:1; 17:6; 33:6; 2 Chr 5:10), and ‘all Israel’ (in Dt 29:1, 10–11) but in Chronicles as well. Van der Woude (
The period described in Malachi is commonly located between 516–458 BCE, between the completion of the temple reconstruction and the arrival of Ezra. Dating Malachi 3:22–24 is not as clear, but possibly somewhere in the late 4th century BCE (Snyman
In Malachi 3:5, a series of horizontal covenant breaches are listed; see Isaiah 59. They are covered in Deuteronomy 12–26 as well.
Notice the conditional character of the judgement prophecy (Ml 2:2 – ‘if’). See Wielenga (
Despite the probably high levels of literacy in the elitist circles of society, see Schaper (
In Deuteronomy 4:9,
There is no need or no space to go into the diachronic debate on the provenance of Deuteronomy and its sources and their historical reliability. The synchronic approach of this article presumes the narrated time as presented in Deuteronomy and takes the book’s authority in the postexilic era as decisive. See Arnold (
For the present discussion on the literary relationship between the Pentateuch and EN, see Bautch (
The explanations of the meaning of the Hebrew word for
The three terms (
The literature on Deuteronomy 12 is extensive; see for instance Arnold (
It is interesting to notice that the two prophetic personalities mentioned, Moses and Elijah, periodise Israel’s history. The first witnessed the birth of the (12-tribe) nation, ‘all Israel’; and the second announced its reconfiguration into a remnant-state, the 7 000 who did not bow down before Baal (1 Ki 19:18).
In the NT, this prophetic ministry is taken up by John the Baptist (Mt 3:1–12) and later the apostles (Mt 28:16–20), causing the delay of the Parousia (Wielenga
For ‘the covenant with Levi’ (Ml 2:4–5), see Snyman (
This name, ‘Yahweh Tsebaōth’, appears nine times in this section; in Haggai 1–2, 12 times (Wielenga
In the so-called pre-exilic Zion-ideology, this idea got hold of the people (Jr 7; 26). See Wielenga (
This could plead for an eschatological reading of these verses (despite Van der Woude’s
See Arnold (
For the thesis defended by M. Weinfeld about secularisation and demythologisation as a result of the Deuteronomy 12 cult centralisation, see Arnold (
See Wielenga (
Notice in Deuteronomy 17:14–20 the minimised political and judicial role of the king, placed under the authority of the divine King from whom the law of Moses originates (Lohfink
See Paulo (
Considering the poor socio-economic situation in Yehud, it could well be that marrying into the neighbouring, well-established families of the landed inhabitants, some of whom also claimed shared religious origins with them (see note 28), was regarded as a way out of poverty, advancing social security. Snyman (
Maybe in opposition to the Samaritans’ claim of Mount Gerizim as the chosen place (Dt 12), see note 28.
See Wielenga (
There is an allusion here to the forensic basis of the covenant in the OT (Gn 15:9–21; Ex 24:4–8; Dt 26:16–19): it was publicly concluded in a sacrificial ceremony with God being witness (Wielenga
Just as in Malachi 2:13–16, also in Deuteronomy 24:1–4 the message is not about a timeless moral imperative prohibiting divorce in all circumstances, but about a timeless theological principle concerning the treatment of women.
For a missional reading of Malachi focusing on the delay of the Day of the Lord, see Wielenga (
Centrifugal mission is anticipated in the OT, but firmly put on the agenda of the church in the NT (Mt 28:16–20); see Wielenga (
That the worship service is rather dimensionally and mostly not intentionally orientated on mission, does not diminish its unrelinquishable unity with it (Wielenga
One could think of the excruciating debates around the position of women in conservative evangelical churches in the USA (or elsewhere), see Glahn (