The Twelve and Differing Orders
The Minor Prophets have been hypothesized to be one book that has twelve chapters corresponding to the twelve oracles. If this is true, then the order of the Twelve become important in understanding the books as a whole. If there are differing orders of these books it then either needs to be understood that one is correct and the other is wrong or that the twelve is more like a loose collection of writings that is not necessarily relevant to understanding the Twelve. Currently there are three possibilities for the order of the books. The Masortic text (MT), the order found in the western bible. The second is the order found in the Septuagint (LXX), and the third is the order given by the Dead Sea scrolls.
If one of the orders can be proven to be the order of the Minor Prophets then it would give weight to the idea that the Minor Prophets are really just one book and should be studied as such. While the closeness of the texts in terms of themes and motifs throughout the Minor Prophets stacks the deck in favor of a one-book approach it would be a confirmable order that tips the scales in it favor.
Dead Sea Scrolls
Starting with the third option we see that it has been hypothesized that Jonah followed Malachi and came at the end of the Minor Prophets. This hypothesis is based on the work of Russell Earl Fuller and his reconstruction of fragments found in the 4b cave at Qumran.[1] This reconstruction is found to be faulty on a couple of bases. First the fragments might not have even come from the same scroll in this cave.
“In fact, it is not even sure that the Jonah and the Malachi fragments attributed to 4QXIIa belonged to the same scroll. Cave 4 is the most problematic of all the Qumran caves since it is in fact constituted of two caves, 4a and 4b. There is no way to know from which side fragments came from and whether a given set of fragments classified as belonging to the same scroll were actually collected from the same side of Cave IV.”[2]
This shows that it is possible that the fragments might not have come from the same scroll let alone the same cave. With the number of people involved in the project and the length of time it took to recover all the fragments from the Qumran site the possibility that the fragments were miss allocated is greatly multiplied.
The hypothesis that Jonah followed Malachi in the Qumran tradition is based on the fact that the fragments were part of a scroll that contained a copy of all twelve Minor Prophets. This is based on the fact that if the scroll contained two of the twelve then it must contain all twelve. Yet there are other fragments that come from other caves that have just one or two of the Minor Prophets inscribed on them.
“Attributing this fragment to Zechariah was dictated by the presupposition that a scroll containing two Minor Prophets is a scroll of the XII. Brooke mentions a fragment of Joel 4.1–4, supposedly coming from Cave 4, and 5QAmos, containing only Amos or Amos at the beginning of a collection. There is thus a considerable amount of unconnected fragments of the Minor Prophets that calls for a reconsideration of the 4QXII phenomenon.”[3]
This further proves the point that the idea that there was a Book of the Twelve at Qumran and that the book followed a different order is unsubstantiated. Furthermore this goes to prove that instead of a book of the twelve it is more likely that the minor prophets were treated as a collection of writings with a lose and shifting order that was stabilized in later years. [4]
The Septuagint
The second order is found in the LXX. The LXX and the MT keep the last six books in the same order and changes the order of the first six books to Hosea, Amos, Micah, Joel, Obadiah, and Jonah.[5] This is much more thematic and less chronological in its understanding. Here we see that Hosea provides the introduction while Amos and Micah continue the thematic elements that Hosea introduced us to.
“The initial LXX sequence of Hosea, Amos, and Micah expresses concern with the disruption and ultimate restoration of Israel’s relationship with YHWH, as well as with restoring the unity of the people of Israel and Judah around the house of David and the Jerusalem temple.” [6]
This seems to show that the LXX order was put together by an editor that wanted to highlight particular themes as we move thorough the books.
The next section of books: Joel, Obadiah, Jonah, and Nahum shift the focus from Israel to the nations, with oracles and warnings against the nations for their misdeeds. There is an over arching theme that those who repent will be granted forgiveness and that those who do not, will not receive mercy. We see that in the Jonah as even Nineveh is saved. Also the Day of the Lord is a motif that is used all throughout this section of the Book of the Twelve. This splits the Minor Prophets into two major sections the first dealing with Israel and the second dealing with the nations.[7]
The idea that chronology played a big part in the ordering of these books is undermined by the fact that other than loosely following the general centuries the “editors” of the Minor Prophets did not place books correctly and precisely in each century. Rather they chose to follow a more thematic development for the LXX, which is judgment on the northern kingdom and then judgment on the nations, along with Israel’s restoration.[8]
The Masortic Texts
The last order is that of the MT. This is the order that we find in our bibles and in what is considered to be the Hebrew Canon. This is the order that most scholars who advocate for the organization of the Minor Prophets into a single volume use. Canonical advocates prefer the order because it is the Hebrew structure and the order that they have chosen to use in their canon of scripture.
While the last six books of the Minor Prophets are the same in both the MT and LXX orders the MT follows a different order. This order instead of emphasizing Israel and then the nations it mixes the two.
“The result is the placement of two programmatic books at the beginning—Hosea outlines the disrupted relationship between YHWH and Israel and calls for Israel’s repentance; Joel outlines YHWH’s defense of Jerusalem and Israel on the Day of YHWH, emphasizing the transformation of the cosmos as YHWH manifests sovereignty over the nations.” [9]
The rest of the books follow these two books and further build on the idea that Israel has turned away and God will protect a remnant and rebuild Zion.
The MT highlights Jerusalem and the need for Israel to repent and return to God right off the bat. And in Amos we see God’s primary concern is for Jerusalem and His people the Jews. This seems to point to drastically different views on the books and the messages they give. While the MT points toward a distinctly Jewish God the LXX seems to look forward toward a God that accepts all people and wants all men to repent. This would be consistent with the major differences in the two texts. Traditionally the LXX has been more messianic and looking toward a time when all men know God, while the MT has been more conservative in its understanding of the messianic passages and concerned with the Jewish people.
The MT order is purported to be the majority order in most ancient texts. Therefore because it is the most common order that we have in the manuscripts it therefore must be the order that we should follow. “…But the fact remains that the Twelve were almost always ordered in ancient times as the are today.”[10]
Those that hold to the unity of the twelve cite the fact that no matter how the order of the prophetic books seem to change from manuscript to manuscript the twelve are always place together.
“The order of the books within the section of the Latter Prophets varies considerably with in the Jewish lists. The Talmudic order has the sequence: Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Isaiah, the Twelve; the French and German manuscripts the tradition Jeremiah, Isaiah, Ezekiel, the Twelve; the Masoretic and Spanish manuscripts the order: Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, the Twelve.”[11]
The major point to notice here is that while the order of the prophets changed from tradition to tradition the Twelve stayed together as a whole. The different traditions did not for instance take Jonah and place it before Isaiah.
Conclusions
Accepting the idea that the Minor Prophets are one book and need to be interpreted under that light presents a problem with these two traditions in order. The fact that the differing orders of the MT and LXX have different overall theological implications when studied as a single unit means that one must be right and one must be wrong or that there is not one fixed order but that a third option is available.
Because of the differing ideas in the orders and the fact that there are different orders it seems more likely that the twelve Minor Prophets are not one whole book but part of an anthology where books have similar themes and loose associations to each other.
“That differing orders achieved fixity in diverse canonical traditions does not however, suggest that these books constitute a ‘literary unity.’ To the contrary, diverse orderings argue in the direction of an anthology rather than a book.”[12]
This being said a better approach to the study of the Minor Prophets would be one that takes into consideration the similar thematic ideas but makes no effort to string the books into a cohesive whole unit that is one book with each prophet acting as a chapter and informing our understanding of the next prophet.
The diversity of the authors of the Minor Prophets help to push the idea that the twelve should not be understood as a literary unit but as a collection of writing.
“The exegetical problems of the book of the twelve are in many regards comparable with those of the book of Isaiah. Here, as there, very different prophetic voices from very varied times have been combined and now expect to be read in a particular sense as unity.”[13]
This difficulty of threading the needle of time, space, and differing styles is negated when looked at as not one big book to be understood in a sequential manor but as a free flowing, thematic driven collection of writings.
By taking using the third method and looking at the Minor Prophets as an anthology, in which order is no necessarily relevant, the thematic and issue come to the forefront and the theological implications of the differing orders drops away. This allows the Twelve to still be viewed as a single book. Just like there are books of essays on a single topic with varying authors with varying styles there are still similarities throughout the collection of writings that bind the book in a loose unity. It is this flowing unity that leads me to understand the Minor Prophets as not a hard and fast literary unit but one that is like a collection of essay on a theme.
Guillaume, Philippe. The unlikely Malachi-Jonah Sequence. The Journal of Hebrew Scriptures. Vol 7, Article 15.
House, Paul R. Old Testament Theology. Downers Grove, Ill. : InterVarsity Press, 1998. Print.
House, Paul R. The unity of the Twelve. Sheffield, England : Almond Press, 1990. Print.
Nogalski, James D. and Sweeney, Marvin A. eds. Reading and hearing the book of the Twelve. Atlanta : Society of Biblical Literature, 2000. Print.
Rendtorff, Rolf. The canonical Hebrew Bible: a theology of the Old Testament. Leiden : Deo Pub., 2005. Print.
[1] Guilaume, Philippe p. 1
[4] “The most complete manuscripts of the Minor Prophets dated before the turn of the era are 4QXIIg and 8HevXIIgr with eight and seven (six attested!) Minor Prophets respectively. Before the turn of the era, the Twelve constituted no more than an anthology gathered in a somewhat flexible order, which later on became fixed.24 A shift by a century or two of the period when the writings of the twelve prophets were copied onto a single scroll and counted as a single book is bound to have major consequences on the reconstruction of the formation of the collection since most studies of the subject give too much credence to hypothetical reconstructions of Dead Sea Scrolls and have embraced the 4QXII designation uncritically.” Guilaume, Philippe. p. 10
[5] House R, Paul. Old Testament Theology. p. 346
[6] Sweeny A, Marvin. p. 57
[7] Sweeny A, Marvin. p. 59
[8] Sweeny A, Marvin. p. 62
[9] Sweeny A, Marvin. p. 63
[10] House R, Paul. The Unity of the Twelve. p. 26
[11] Childs, Brevard. . p. 309
[12] Peterson L, Daniel Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve p. 7
[13] Rendtorff, Rolf. p. 266
No comments:
Post a Comment