Introduction The subject of the use of the Old Testament in the New continues to generate publications from a wide variety of perspectives. 1 One key area of interest is the debate over what is the proper context in which to understand a New Testament author s quotation of an Old Testament text. Is first-century Judaism the primary context? Is the composition of the Hebrew Bible the primary context? Do the New Testament authors isolate their quotations, or do they presuppose knowledge of the larger context of the books from which they quote? 2 If they presuppose knowledge of the larger context, then what are the precise boundaries of their sources? These questions are especially pressing with regard to quotations from the Book of the Twelve (Hos Mal). According to the UBS Greek New Testament index there are thirty quotations within the New Testament from Hosea, Joel, Amos, Jonah, Micah, Habakkuk, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi together excluding only Obadiah, Nahum, and Zephaniah. But despite the recent research on the historical and internal evidence for the compositional unity of the Twelve Prophets the final form of the book has received little attention in introductions, commentaries, and treatments of New Testament quotations from the Twelve, which prefer instead to discuss each of the Prophets separately. 3 The result of this neglect is something akin to the isolation of Genesis from the Pentateuch, or First Isaiah from Second Isaiah. Such a limitation on the context in which to understand quotes from the Twelve inevitably leads to the surface impression that the New Testament authors have simply wrenched quotes from the original context in order to suit their own purposes. But what if quotations from the Twelve presuppose an awareness of their place within the larger composition of Hosea through Malachi? What if it is necessary to redefine the original or immediate context of any one part of the Twelve to include the compositional strategy and theological message of the book as a whole? The usual reflex to this sort of talk is that the Twelve Prophets are twelve separate books, which should be rearranged chronologically according to the tenets of historical criticism. But the composition of the Twelve is really no different from that of other books of the Hebrew Bible. It consists of sources from different times and places, which have been put together or shaped in a
2 The Twelve Prophets in the New Testament theologically unified way not unlike the books of Kings and Chronicles, for example. Historical criticism has gone too far in the direction of the prehistory of the text and not far enough in the direction of the final form of the text. To stop short of the final form of the Twelve is to stop short of a real historical moment of authorship and composition. The Book of the Twelve is the product of authorial/compositional intention. Its work goes beyond that of an editor or redactor. 4 It bears the marks of a single composer and not those of a committee or lengthy development wherein there would be signs of compromise or even contradiction. Examination of New Testament quotes within the context of this final prophetic author s work reveals remarkable consistency between the original text and the New Testament context. It is not necessary to presuppose that the New Testament authors were consistent with their sources, but neither is it necessary to assume they were not. The present introduction provides a brief review of the historical evidence for the unity of the Twelve and an overview of the compositional seams of the book. Treatment of the quotations from the Twelve in the New Testament then forms the main part of the volume in chapters one through three. This study follows the order of the Twelve rather than the order of the New Testament. A discussion about alternative arrangements of the Twelve appears in chapter four (see also appendix two). Appendix one demonstrates that the New Testament authors awareness of larger contexts is not unique to their quotations from the Book of the Twelve. Historical Evidence for the Unity of the Twelve 1. The apocryphal book of Sirach (c. 200 B.C.) refers to Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the Twelve Prophets (Sir 49:10) and does not list the Twelve separately. 2. The Qumran scrolls (4QXII a c, e c. 150 25 B.C.) combine more than one book on a single scroll. The oldest of these (4QXII a ) ends with Jonah. 3. The Greek Minor Prophets Scroll from Nah al H ever (8H evxii gr, c. 50 B.C. A.D. 50) has parts of Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk, Zephaniah, and Zechariah. It reflects the traditional Hebrew order of the first six books over against the order of what became the standard Greek translation (i.e., the Septuagint: Hos, Amos, Mic, Joel, Obad, and Jon).
Introduction 3 4. The New Testament (first century A.D.) makes several references to individual books of the Twelve with the plural term prophets (e.g., Acts 7:42; 13:40; 15:15). 5. MurXII (c. A.D. 75 100) is a Hebrew scroll of the Twelve from the Judean wilderness (w/parts of Joel Zech). It also follows the traditional Hebrew order of the books. 6. Virtually every list of canonical books such as that of the church father Jerome or that of the Babylonian Talmud (b. B. Bat.14b, 15a) from the first century through the sixth century A.D. counts Hosea Malachi as one book. 7. The Masoretic Text (medieval), which marks the mid-point of every biblical book, does not mark the mid-point of each of the books of the Twelve. Rather, it marks Mic 3:12 as the mid-point of the whole book of the Twelve. The Compositional Seams of the Twelve Several recent publications have set forth the verbal and thematic links between the Twelve Prophets. 5 It will have to suffice here to survey the major seams that connect the ends of the books to the beginnings of those that follow them. 6 Each one of these seams ties in to the programmatic passage of the Twelve in Hos 3:4 5. The seams obviously do not work in the secondary arrangement of the Septuagint, which has more to do with placement of the longer of the first six books at the beginning. 1. The final verse of Hosea (Hos 14:10 [Eng., 14:9]) and the opening verses of Joel (Joel 1:2 3) employ distinctive language and thematic material from the wisdom literature: the contrast of the righteous and the wicked (Prov 10:1 22:16) and the passing of instruction from the older generation to the younger (Prov 1 9). This guides the reader to seek wisdom in the Twelve about God s activity. 7 2. There is a quote from the conclusion to Joel (Joel 4:16 [Eng., 3:16]) at the beginning of Amos (Amos 1:2). Joel and Amos also have a similar view of the Day of the LORD (Joel 2:2; Amos 5:18 20). The eschatological Day of the LORD will involve the two parts of Hos 3:4 5: judgment (Hos 3:4) and restoration at the end of the days (Hos 3:5). 3. Amos 9:12 presents Edom as a representative of the nations to be possessed in the future Davidic kingdom. The following work of
4 The Twelve Prophets in the New Testament Obadiah is about the judgment of Edom (Obad 1 15) and the possession of Gentiles in the LORD s kingdom (Obad 16 21). The messianic kingdom of Hos 3:5 includes the Gentiles. 4. Nineveh the great city (Gen 10:11 12; Jon 1:2; 3:2) is to Jonah what Edom was to Amos and Obadiah: a representative of the Gentiles to be included in God s kingdom. 5. Assyria continues to serve in Micah as a figure for the Gentile domain to be possessed in the messianic kingdom (e.g., Mic 5). 6. The concluding verses of Micah (Mic 7:18 20) and the opening verses of Nahum (Nah 1:2 3) both borrow language from the description of God in Exod 34:6 7. The LORD is gracious and compassionate (Hos 3:5), but he will not leave the guilty unpunished (Hos 3:4). 7. The theophany in the Nah 1:2 8 and the one in Hab 3:3 15 serve as bookends for the two works. Both look forward to the day of distress (Nah 1:7; Hab 3:16), which corresponds to the Day of the LORD (Zeph 1:15). 8. The end of Habakkuk (Hab 2:20; 3:16) and the beginning of Zephaniah (Zeph 1:7, 15) share verbal links related to the Day of the LORD. 9. The restoration section of Zeph 3:9 20 relates to Haggai in a manner similar to the relationship between the restoration section of Ezek 33 39 and the following vision of the temple (Ezek 40 48). In both cases the temple represents future restoration (Hos 3:5). 10. Haggai (Hag 1:1; 2:1, 10, 20) and Zechariah (1:1, 7; 7:1) are connected by virtue of the date of their prophetic ministries (Ezra 5:1 2). Zechariah (Zech 3:8; 6:12 13) also picks up the messianic language in Haggai s presentation of Zerubbabel (Hag 2:23) and points to a figure in the future (Hos 3:5). 11. The heading the oracle of the word of the LORD occurs three times in the Hebrew Bible: Zech 9:1; 12:1; Mal 1:1. Malachi is thus a third section to the second half of Zechariah. The word yk)lm or my messenger in Mal 1:1 (Septuagint: his messenger ) anticipates the description of a messenger or prophet like Elijah who will prepare the way for the messianic future in Mal 3:1, 23 (Eng., 4:5; cf., Isa 40:3 5).
Introduction 5 Notes 1 E.g., Richard N. Longenecker, Biblical Exegesis in the Apostolic Period, 2d ed. (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1999); G. K. Beale and D. A. Carson, eds., Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007); Kenneth Berding and Jonathan Lunde, eds., Three Views on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2007). 2 See C. H. Dodd, According to the Scriptures: The Substructure of New Testament Theology (New York: Scribner s, 1952). 3 E.g., Maarten J. J. Menken and Steve Moyise, The Minor Prophets in the New Testament (London: T&T Clark, 2009). 4 This statement presupposes a careful distinction between the terms author/composer and editor/redactor. A biblical author is not someone who merely writes individual sources. A biblical author is someone who puts together or composes large pieces of text and gives the book its overall theological message. An editor/redactor in the traditional sense works with small-scale relations and is not responsible for the meaning of the text as a whole. 5 Paul House, The Unity of the Twelve, (Sheffield: Almond, 1990); James Nogalski, Literary Precursors to the Book of the Twelve, BZAW 217 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1993); idem, Redactional Processes in the Book of the Twelve, BZAW 218 (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1993); Barry Alan Jones, The Formation of the Book of the Twelve: A Study in Text and Canon (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995); James Nogalski and Marvin A. Sweeney, eds., Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve, (Atlanta: SBL, 2000); Christopher R. Seitz, Prophecy and Hermeneutics: Toward a New Introduction to the Prophets (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2007). 6 See Michael B. Shepherd, Compositional Analysis of the Twelve, ZAW 120 (2008): 184 93. The orthography of the Masoretic Text of the Book of the Twelve is also an important piece of internal evidence: The Minor Prophets are remarkably homogeneous in their spelling. The Book of the Twelve was evidently edited and transmitted as a single scroll (Francis I. Andersen and A. Dean Forbes, Spelling in the Hebrew Bible, BibOr 41 [Rome: Biblical Institute Press, 1986], 315 16). 7 The relationship between this reading strategy and the messianic program of Hos 3:4 5 is evident in a comparison with the compositional seams of the Hebrew Bible as a whole. At the conclusion of the Pentateuch and the beginning of the Prophets the wise man Joshua (Deut 34:9 [cf., Num 27:18]) receives instruction to meditate in the Torah day and night (Josh 1:8) in expectation of the messianic prophet like Moses (Deut 34:10 [see Deut 18:15, 18]). At the conclusion of the Prophets and the beginning of the Writings the wise reader is to meditate in the Torah day and night (Ps 1:2) in expectation of the forerunner prophet like Elijah (Mal 3:1, 23 [Eng., 4:5]). Psalm 1 features the same contrast between the righteous and the wicked as Hos 14:10 (Eng., 14:9). See John H. Sailhamer, Introduction to Old Testament Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995), 239 49; Joseph Blenkinsopp, Prophecy and Canon: A Contribution to the Study of Jewish Origins (Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press, 1977), 86 95, 120 23.