Messengers of Hope in Haggai—Malachi

1. C.L. Meyers and E.M. Meyers, Haggai, Zechariah 1—8: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB, 25B; Garden City: Doubleday, 1987), pp. xliv-xlv.

2. For catchwords (e.g. `love'/`hate' in Zech. 8.17 and Mal. 1.2-3; `entreat the face of YHWH' in Zech. 8.22 and Mal. 1.9), see especially J.D. Nogalski, Literary Precursors to the Book of the Twelve (BZAW, 217; Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1993), pp. 53-56; J.D. Nogalski, Redactional Processes in the Book of the Twelve (BZAW, 218; Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1993), p. 187 n. 21, where he lists 12 words or phrases common to Zech. 8.9-23 and Mal. 1.1-14. For Nogalski, Haggai/Zech. 1—8 entered the Book first, then came Malachi and finally Zech. 9—14. For the connections between Malachi and the larger corpus of Haggai—Zech. 1—8, see E. Bosshard and R.G. Kratz, `Maleachi im Zwölfprophetenbuch', BN 52 (1990), pp. 27-46, who see Malachi as originally the continuation of Zech. 7—8, although later expanded in two phases. See the criticism of using the catchword phenomenon for redaction theory in B.A. Jones, The Formation of the Book of the Twelve: A Study in Text and Canon (SBLDS, 149; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1995), pp. 175-91; E. Ben Zvi, `Twelve Prophetic Books or “The Twelve”: A Few Preliminary Considerations', in J.W. Watts and P.R. House (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature: Essays on Isaiah and the Twelve in Honor of John D.W. Watts (JSOTSup, 235; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), pp. 126-56.

3. See especially Nogalski, Literary Precursors; idem, Redactional Processes; T. Collins, The Mantle of Elijah: The Redaction Criticism of the Prophetical Books (The Biblical Seminar, 20; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1993), pp. 80-81; P.L. Redditt, `Zechariah 9—14, Malachi, and the Redaction of the Book of the Twelve', in Watts and House (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature, pp. 245-68; P.L. Redditt, `Zechariah 9—14: The Capstone of the Book of the Twelve', in M.J. Boda and M.H. Floyd (eds.), Bringing Out the Treasure: Inner Biblical Allusion and Zechariah 9—14 (JSOTSup, 370; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 2003), pp. 305-32. Nogalski argued that Zech. 9—11 was added first to smooth the transition between Zech. 8 and Malachi; Zech. 12.1—13.2 (3-6) was added to correct chs. 9—11 with a more positive attitude toward Jerusalem; and then 14.1-21 was added, relocating at the same time 13.7-9 to function as a transition to the remnant motif in Zech. 14.2 and adding superscriptions in 9.1 and 12.1. Since Zech. 13.9 echoes Hos. 1.9; 2.25 and Mal. 3.2-3, which open and close the Book of the Twelve, when Zech. 13.9 was added it assumed a book of the Twelve that began with Hosea and ended with Malachi; Nogalski, Redactional Processes, pp. 234-36, 245-46; idem, `Zechariah 13.7-9 as a Transitional Text: An Appreciation and Reevaluation of the Work of Rex Mason', in Boda and Floyd (eds.), Bringing Out the Treasure, pp. 292-305. Collins, Mantle, pp. 63-64, 80-81, has Haggai/Zech. 1—8 entering near the time of the temple reconstruction, and in the mid-fifth century BCE Malachi (with Joel, Habakkuk, and additions to Zephaniah), and finally Zech. 9—14 and Mal. 4.4-6. Steck argues that the foundational layer of Malachi was added to Zech. 8, after which then there was a slow accretion of parts of Zech. 9—14 until finally Malachi was distinguished from Zechariah in the Greek period; O. Steck, Der Abschluss der Prophetie im Alten Testament: Ein Versuch zur Frage der Vorgeschichte des Kanons (BTS, 17; Neukirchen—Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag, 1991), pp. 196-98; cf. the table in Redditt, `Capstone', pp. 315-32.

4. Schart's catchwords and themes include the superscription, the emphasis on the holiness of the house of Yahweh in Zech. 14.20-21 and the emphasis on temple and priesthood in Mal. 1, the catchword `king' in Zech. 14.9 and Mal. 1.14. This evidence is cited by Redditt, `Capstone', p. 317, and expanded to include the connection to `one' in Mal. 2.10, 15, but it is turned around to mean that Zech. 14 `drew upon Malachi's thought'.

5. For Schart it was a pre-existent corpus of Hag. 1—Zech. 1—8 (possibly with Zech. 9—13) that first joined the book that became the Book of the Twelve. First, Zech. 14 (and Zech. 9—13 if not already there) and subsequently Malachi were added in later redactional phases; see A. Schart, Die Entstehung des Zwölfprophetenbuchs (BZAW, 260; Berlin: W. de Gruyter, 1998); idem, Entstehung, pp. 252-60, 297-303; idem, `Reconstructing the Redaction History of the Twelve Prophets: Problems and Models', in J.D. Nogalski and M.A. Sweeney (eds.), Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve (Symposium; Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2000), pp. 34-48 (42).

6. A. Schart (`Putting the Eschatological Visions of Zechariah in Their Place: Malachi as a Hermeneutical Guide for the Last Section of the Book of the Twelve', in Boda and Floyd [eds.], Bringing Out the Treasure, pp. 333-43 [339]) notes: `I do not think that Zechariah and Malachi formed a literary stratum from the very beginning. The evidence is too weak.'

7. B.G. Curtis, `Social Location and Redaction History in the Haggai—Zechariah— Malachi Corpus' (unpublished paper delivered to the Society of Biblical Literature, Washington, DC, 1993), with thanks to the presenter for a written copy of the paper.

8. Curtis, `Social Location'; idem, `The Daughter of Zion Oracles and the Appendices to Malachi: Evidence on the Later Redactors and redaction of the Book of the Twelve', SBLSP 37 (1998), pp. 872-92; idem, `The Zion—Daughter Oracles: Evidence on the Identity and Ideology of the Late Redactors of the Book of the Twelve', in Nogalski and Sweeney (eds.), Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve, pp. 166-84; see now idem, The Steep and Stony Road: The Book of Zechariah in Social Location Analysis (Academia Biblica; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 2006). Curtis argues for commonality between Haggai and Zech. 1—8 on the one side and Zech. 9—14 and Malachi on the other, but provides little argumentation for how these two were fused together. Curtis' focus on the Daughter—Zion oracles is important, but what I question is lack of focus on the oracle in Zech. 2 which has far more in common with Zeph. 3.14-20 than with Zech. 9.1-10. See also the earlier view of R.E. Wolfe, `Editing of the Book of the Twelve', ZAW 53 (1935), pp. 90-129 (117-25), who saw Haggai, Zechariah (including chs. 9—14) and Malachi entering in the last phase of the Book, and D.A. Schneider, `The Unity of the Book of the Twelve' (Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1979), esp. pp. 115-52, who suggests the inclusion of Haggai—Malachi in the fifth century.

9. M.J. Boda, `From Dystopia to Myopia: Utopian (Re)Visions in Haggai and Zechariah 1—8', in E. Ben Zvi and M. Floyd (eds.), Utopia and Dystopia in Prophetic Texts (Publications of the Finnish Exegetical Society; Helsinki: Finnish Exegetical Society/University of Helsinki; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2006).

10. M.J. Boda, `Zechariah: Master Mason or Penitential Prophet?', in B. Becking and R. Albertz (eds.), Yahwism After the Exile: Perspectives on Israelite Religion in the Persian Era (Studies in Theology and Religion; Assen: Van Gorcum, 2003), pp. 49-69; contra, for instance, Schart, `Eschatological Visions', p. 334 n. 2, who claims that the `narrative framework' (a term he prefers to `superscription') in Haggai and Zech. 1—8 `seamlessly combines the prophecies of Haggai and Zechariah'.

11. B. Halpern, `The Ritual Background of Zechariah's Temple Song', CBQ 40 (1978), pp. 167-90.

12. M.J. Boda, `Terrifying the Horns: Persia and Babylon in Zechariah 1.7—6.15', CBQ 67 (2005), pp. 22-41.

13. M.J. Boda, `From Fasts to Feasts: The Literary Function of Zechariah 7—8', CBQ 65 (2003), pp. 390-407.

14. M.J. Boda, `Reading Between the Lines: Zechariah 11.4-16 in its Literary Contexts', in Boda and Floyd (eds.), Bringing Out the Treasure, pp. 277-91; M.J. Boda and S.E. Porter, `Literature to the Third Degree: Prophecy in Zechariah 9—14 and the Passion of Christ', in M. Jinbachian and R. David (eds.), Traduire le Bible hébraïque. De la Septante à la Nouvelle Bible Segond/Translating the Hebrew Bible: From the Septuagint to the Nouvelle Bible Segond (Sciences bibliques, 15; Montreal: Médiaspaul, 2005), pp. 215-54; cf. the superb work of P.L. Redditt, `Israel's Shepherds: Hope and Pessimism in Zechariah 9—14', CBQ 51 (1989), pp. 631-42.

15. Boda, `Fasts to Feasts', pp. 390-407.

16. Curtis, `Social Location', and Steep and Stony Road.

17. See how much of Pierce's work was embraced by Nogalski, Redactional Processes, pp. 201-204, even though Nogalski shows that Zech. 9—14 stands apart.

18. R.W. Pierce, `Literary Connectors and a Haggai—Zechariah—Malachi Corpus', JETS 27 (1984), pp. 277-89; idem, `A Thematic Development of the Haggai—Zechariah— Malachi Corpus', JETS 27 (1984), pp. 401-11; see also K.M. Craig, `Interrogatives in Haggai—Zechariah: A Literary Thread?', in Watts and House (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature, pp. 224-44, who argues more precisely for different types of questions in Haggai and Zech. 1—8 that for him indicate unity for Haggai/Zech. 1—8. Some of the categories he uses are not convincing and even if they were accepted, one wonders whether this would lead us to argue for the unity of Haggai/Zech. 1—8 with many books in the Hebrew Bible.

19. See M.J. Boda, `Haggai: Master Rhetorician', TynBul 51 (2000), pp. 295-304.

20. Pierce, `Literary Connectors', pp. 287-88.

21. L. Bauer, Zeit des zweiten Tempels-Zeit der Gerechtigkeit. Zur sozio-ökonomischen Konzeption im Haggai—Sacharja—Maleachi-Korpus (BEATAJ, 31; Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 1992).

22. P.R. House, The Unity of the Twelve (Bible and Literature Series, 27; Sheffield: Almond Press, 1990).

23. T. Lescow, Das Buch Malächi: Texttheorie—Auslegung—Kanontheorie (Arbeiten zur Theologie, 75; Stuttgart: Calwer Verlag, 1993), pp. 186-87; cf. T. Lescow, `Sacharja 1—8: Verkündigung und Komposition', BN 68 (1993), pp. 75-99; cf. Redditt, `Twelve', pp. 247-48.

24. Cf. Redditt, `Twelve', pp. 247-48.

25. As seen in Conrad's works: Reading Isaiah (OBT, 27; Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1991), pp. 12-20; `Prophet, Redactor and Audience: Reforming the Notion of Isaiah's Formation', in M.A. Sweeney and R.F. Melugin (eds.), New Visions of Isaiah (JSOTSup, 214; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1996), pp. 306-25; Zechariah (Readings; Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1999), pp. 16-18. See my review, `Review of Conrad: Reading the Latter Prophets (2003)', RBL (2005), available online at <http:// www.bookreviews.org/pdf/4227_4163.pdf>.

26. E.W. Conrad, `Messengers in Isaiah and the Twelve: Implications for Reading Prophetic Books', JSOT 91 (2000), pp. 83-97; `The End of Prophecy and the Appearance of Angels/Messengers in the Book of the Twelve', JSOT 73 (1997), pp. 65-79; Zechariah, esp. pp. 22-42; Reading the Latter Prophets (JSOTSup, 376; London: T&T Clark International, 2003).

27. Conrad, Latter Prophets, p. 260; as Conrad says in `End of Prophecy', p. 67: `The Twelve as a collage pictures the rise and fall of a prophetic past and the reinstitution of an angelic/messenger presence. Prophecy in the Twelve is valued as a past institution that is coming to an end.'

28. Conrad, Latter Prophets, p. 261.

29. For this see especially Conrad, `Messengers', pp. 94-97, where he cites texts like Gen. 28.17, 22; Judg. 6.24; 2 Sam. 24; 1 Chron. 21.18; 22.1.

30. Conrad (`End of Prophecy', p. 78) weakly tries to anticipate this criticism by claiming that Haggai as both prophet and messenger `represents a transition point in the literature'.

31. W.M. Schniedewind, The Word of God in Transition: From Prophet to Exegete in the Second Temple Period (JSOTSup, 197; Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1995), p. 62, notes: `The use of angels to mediate the prophetic word then is characteristic of post-exilic prophecy'.

32. For the royal figure to be identified or compared to a of God is not surprising and can be found at three places in the Former Prophets (1 Sam. 29.9; 2 Sam. 14.17; 19.27). The comparison to `God' is also not odd, in light of the fact that the king is described in Ps. 2.7 as the adopted son of deity; cf. D.L. Petersen, Zechariah 9—14 and Malachi: A Commentary (OTL; Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1995), p. 119. Petersen's view, however, on Zech. 12.8 is rather odd, in that he says the verse gives David divine status and then democratizes David as the people (cf. Isa. 55.3), which then affords the people the same semi-divine status as the royal house.

33. For the traditional position on this, see B. Glazier-McDonald, Malachi, The Divine Messenger (SBLDS, 98; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), pp. 71-72; Conrad, `End of Prophecy', pp. 65-79.

34. See M.J. Boda, `Freeing the Burden of Prophecy: Ma and the Legitimacy of Prophecy in Zechariah 9—14', Bib 86 (2006), pp. 338-57. See also my `Oil, Crowns and Thrones: Prophet, Priest and King in Zechariah 1:7—6:15', in Ehud Ben Zvi (ed.), Perspectives on Hebrew Scriptures (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2006), pp. 379-404.

35. K.J. Larkin, The Eschatology of Second Zechariah: A Study of the Formation of a Mantological Wisdom Anthology (CBET, 6; Kampen: Kok, 1994), p. 159, links the image here to that of the angelic presence leading the people in the Exodus (Exod. 14.19) and to the angel who defended Jerusalem against Sennacherib (2 Kgs 19.35); cf. G. Gaide, Jérusalem, voici ton roi: Commentaire du Zacharie 9—14 (LD, 49; Paris: Les Editions du Cerf, 1968), pp. 126-27. She also, however, does note that in 2 Sam. 14.20 the comparison of David with a is related to his wisdom and omniscience, citing then P.A.H. de Boer (`The Counsellor', VTSup 3 [1955], pp. 42-71 [57]) who `notes that “security, victory, recovery and salvation are the effects aimed at by counsel”, and that counsel is a decision which determines the future. It may even be considered as synonymous with an oracle, the word of the prophet or of the priest'. This final link is inappropriate since in this context, the is specifically leading the people, which suggests military leadership, rather than wise counsel.

36. See W. Böhme, `Zu Malächi und Haggai', ZAW 7 (1887), pp. 210-17; H.G.T. Mitchell, J.M.P. Smith and J.A. Brewer, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi and Jonah (ICC; Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1912), pp. 55, 57. Verhoef notes Keil's observation that this interpolation emphasizes Haggai's position as extraordinary messenger, and cites the argument of T. Chary, Aggeé—Zacharie, Malachie (Paris: J. Gabalda, 1969), p. 22, who sees `il conviendrait mieux comme conlusion du v. 14'. However, see the vigorous denial of these arguments by P.A. Verhoef, The Books of Haggai and Malachi (NICOT; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), pp. 83-84; cf. A.S. van der Woude, `De Malak Jahweh: Een Godsbode', NTT 18 (1963—64), pp. 1-13.

37. The phrase is missing in Alexandrinus and Marchalianus, but present in Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, Venetus (cf. C-68; Armenian, Cyril); cf. J. Ziegler, Duodecim prophetae (Septuaginta: Vetus Testamentum Graecum; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1943).

38. Mitchell, Smith and Brewer, Haggai, p. 326; see the list of earlier scholars in R.A. Mason, `The Use of Earlier Biblical Material in Zechariah 9—14: A Study in Inner Biblical Exegesis', in Boda and Floyd (eds.), Bringing Out the Treasure, p. 156 n. 22; R.C. Dentan, `Zechariah 9—14', in G.A. Buttrick (ed.), The Interpreter's Bible (New York: Abingdon, 1956), p. 1107; P.R. Ackroyd, `Haggai/Zechariah', in M. Black and H.H. Rowley (eds.), The New Peake's Bible Commentary (London: Thomas Nelson, 1962), p. 654.

39. There is no question that there is great discomfort with this phrase as attested in the ancient versions. The Targum translates `the house of David shall be like princes ( ) and shall flourish like kings'; the LXX reads `the weakest among them in that day as the house of David, and the house of David as the house of God, as the angel of the Lord before them' ( ό ό ό ό, ό ). See Mitchell, Smith and Brewer, Haggai, p. 329; Mason, `Use', p. 156; C.L. Meyers and E.M. Meyers, Zechariah 9—14: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary (AB, 25C; New York: Doubleday, 1993), pp. 331-32.

40. For the link between these two texts, see Mason, `Use', p. 156.

41. Böhme, `Malächi', pp. 210-17; this, of course, is not accepted by everyone, see the rebuttals by J.M.P. Smith in Mitchell, Smith and Brewer, Haggai, p. 41; Verhoef, Haggai, p. 249.

42. As I neared the completion of this study I was delighted to find support for this link between and redaction from the Meyers who suggested that the phrase in Zech. 12.8 `could well be the mark of a redactor or compiler of the Book of Zechariah. Such a person might also be the one who redacted or influenced the redactor of the Book of Malachi…[who,] in the reference to “Angel”, places these prophetic words squarely into the mainstream of the Haggai—Zechariah—Malachi corpus' (Meyers and Meyers, Zechariah 9—14, p. 332). Notice also D.K. Berry, `Malachi's Dual Design: The Close of the Canon and What Comes Afterward', in Watts and House (eds.), Forming Prophetic Literature, pp. 269-302 (282), who notes Zech. 12.8 in his discussion of Malachi and the oddity of the connection to the house of David, but remains focused on a coming messenger figure who `mysteriously combines the roles of prophet and angel'.

43. See the work of N.G. Cohen, `From Nabi to Mal ak to “Ancient Figure” ', JJS 26 (1985), pp. 12-24. The association of these figures with the heavenly realm is not so shocking. The prophet was always associated with the heavenly realms, especially as the one who had access to the divine council, appearing in the divine realm in such passages as Isa. 6, Ezek. 1—3 and 2 Kgs 20 (cf. Jeremiah's comments about prophets in the council). The priest's association with the heavenly realms comes through his role in entering the sanctuary and the presence of God, the holy of holies being depicted as an entrance to if not the divine council. On Yom Kippur the high priest entered once a year. To find the high priest in the divine council in Zech. 3 is not surprising (for the high priest was allowed to enter God's presence once a year), but in Zech. 3 it does not appear to be on the same level as membership, since he is the one accused. Although the king is never associated with the divine council, he was closely associated with deity, being called the adopted son of deity and functioning as vice-regent of God on earth (Ps. 2). Notice also the conclusions of E.J.C. Tigchelaar, Prophets of Old and the Day of the End: Zechariah, the Book of Watchers and Apocalyptic (OTS, 35; Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1996), pp. 250-52. In his analysis of Zechariah and the Book of Watchers, Tigchelaar notes some of what he calls confusion over the `question of human and angelic roles' (p. 250).

44. Berry, `Dual Design', pp. 269-302 (281-82).

45. As `Dual Design', p. 282, says: `This messenger mysteriously combines the roles of prophet and angel'.

46. The view that dominates scholarship is that Mal. 3.22-24 is a conclusion to larger canonical units, such as the Book of the Twelve or even the Nevi im as a whole; cf. Nogalski, Redactional Processes, p. 185; Schart, Entstehung, pp. 302-303; Curtis, `Zion— Daughter Oracles', pp. 166-84; Redditt, `Capstone', p. 323. However, see Glazier-McDonald, Malachi, pp. 244-70, who argued that `3.22-24 comprises the climax of the prophecy. In them Malachi brings together elements from his preaching into a sharper focus. Indeed, all the major themes of the prophecy are found in these final verses…' (p. 267). Similarly, J.M. O'Brien, Priest and Levite in Malachi (SBLDS, 121; Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990), p. 145. Jones, Formation, pp. 236-37, sees 3.23-24 as a later addition to explain Mal. 3.1; thus `the original literary horizon of Mal. 3.22-24 was limited to the Book of Malachi'. However, he then notes that the shift of this pericope from its order in the LXX (which was Mal. 3.24, 22, 23 which he considers earlier) to its order in MT (3.22, 23, 24, which he considers later) with the change from Elijah the Tishbite (LXX) to Elijah the prophet (MT) suggests that `the prophet may indeed encompass a literary horizon that includes a corpus of Scriptures containing the Torah and a collection of prophetic writings'.

47. So also Conrad, Zechariah, p. 204. Berry, `Dual Design', p. 291, notes that `The role of the prophet Elijah also involves the introduction or identification of the messenger who acts in more of a divine than human role'. Such chariots and horses also appear in Zech. 1-6, as they enter this space between earth and heaven to fulfil God's will on earth.

48. See especially J.H. Charlesworth, `The Portrayal of the Righteous as an Angel', in J.J. Collins and G.W.E. Nickelsburg (eds.), Ideal Figures in Ancient Judaism: Profiles and Paradigms (Septuagint and Cognate Studies; Chico, CA: Scholars Press, 1980), pp. 135-51 (145), who, speaking of documents in Judaism and Christianity in the first few centuries CE, says that they `point to a concept that seems to have been developing within Judaism prior to the second century CE. Figures in Israel's past, especially Adam and Jacob, could be portrayed as angels; others, notably the Rechabites, could be thought of as having been transformed into angels. Some Jews conceived of the possibility for the faithful—probably only a very select few—to transcend humanity and become angels…'; see C.C. Rowland, `The Vision of the Risen Christ in Rev. i.13ff: The Debt of an Early Christology to an Aspect of Jewish Angelology', JTS (1980), pp. 1-11; idem, The Open Heaven (London: SPCK, 1982); idem, `A Man Clothed in Linen: Daniel 10.6ff and Jewish angelology', JSNT 24 (1985), pp. 99-110. L.T. Stuckenbruck, Angel Veneration and Christology: A Study in Early Judaism and in the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (WUNT, 70; Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1995), pp. 271-72, speaking of the book of Revelation, notes: `That there is an analogy between Christology and angelology is apparent from 1.12-20, from attributes shared with some of the angels (e.g., 10.1 and 15.6), and especially from 14.14-20. At the same time, this association seems to be severed emphatically in the vision of the Lamb in chapter 5'. See now idem, `“Angels” and “God”: Exploring the Limits of Early Jewish Monotheism', in L.T. Stuckenbruck and W.E. Sproston North (eds.), Early Jewish and Christian Monotheism (JSNTSup, 263; London: T&T Clark International, 2004), pp. 45-70. P.R. Carroll, Jesus and the Angels: Angelology and the Christology of the Apocalypse of John (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997), p. 226, draws Zech. 1—6 and even 12.8 into the discussion, concluding: `Angelology has influenced the christology of the Apocalypse in such a way that one of its important strands is an angelomorphic Christology which upholds monotheism while providing a means for Jesus to be presented in visible, glorious form to his church'. Also see N.R. Petersen, `Elijah, the Son of God, and Jesus: Some Issues in the Anthropology of Characterization in Mark', in R.A. Argall, B. Bow and R.A. Werline (eds.), For a Later Generation: The Transformation of Tradition in Israel, Early Judaism, and Early Christianity (Harrisburg, PA: Trinity Press International, 2000), pp. 232-40, who argues for angelic possession of John and Jesus. Finally, see C.H.T. Fletcher-Louis, All the Glory of Adam: Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls (STDJ, 42; Leiden: Brill, 2002) p. 32, who, highlighting the three figures of king, Moses and priest, writes: `The characterization of humans in such angelic terms has its roots in the biblical text, but it is clearly being developed in material from the 3rd-2nd centuries B.C.'. Cf. M.S. Barker, The Great Angel: A Study of Israel's Second God (Louisville, KY: Westminster/John Knox Press, 1992); K.P. Sullivan, Wrestling with Angels: A Study of the Relationship between Angels and Humans in Ancient Jewish Literature and the New Testament (AGAJU, 55; Leiden: Brill, 2004). I thank Loren Stuckenbruck for our helpful conversation on this issue.

49. See further M.J. Boda, `Figuring the Future: The Prophets and the Messiah', in S.E. Porter (ed.), Messiah (McMaster New Testament Studies; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2006), pp. 35-74.

50. See now P.L. Redditt, `The King in Haggai—Zechariah 1—8 and the Book of the Twelve', in M.J. Boda and M.H. Floyd (eds.), Tradition in Transition (LHBOTS; London: T&T Clark International, forthcoming). Those responsible for this messenger redaction and its inclusion into the Book of the Twelve may be playing off of or even be responsible for the inclusion of sections of Hos. 12, with its reference to the struggle between Jacob and the `messenger' who is closely associated with `God' (`the Lord God Almighty, the Lord is his name'); see vv. 3-5. Interestingly, in Hos. 12 there is also reference to God's use of prophets to speak to the people (v. 10) as well as to lead the people (v. 13). This may be further evidence of the role Hosea and Malachi play in the Book of the Twelve, this time leveraging the Torah's theology of `messengers'; cf. Conrad, Latter Prophets; J.D.W. Watts, `A Frame for the Book of the Twelve: Hosea 1—3 and Malachi', in Nogalski and Sweeney (eds.), Reading and Hearing the Book of the Twelve, pp. 209-17.