Mark J. Boda, «Freeing the Burden of Prophecy:Mas%s%a4) and the Legitimacy of Prophecy in Zech 9–14», Vol. 87 (2006) 338-357
Prior to the 1980’s the definition of the Hebrew term mas%s%a4) as a reference to
prophetic speech or literature, was largely dominated by etymological
argumentation. However, Richard Weis, in his 1986 Claremont dissertation
leveraged form-critical categories and evidence to argue that this term was a
formal tag defining a particular type of literature, an argument that has been
applied and developed by the subsequent work of Marvin Sweeney (Isaiah,
FOTL; Book of the Twelve, Berit Olam) and Michael Floyd (JBL 12.1 [2002] 401-
422). This paper offers a critical review of this history of research with a view to
its impact on the interpretation of Zechariah 9–14. A new proposal is put forward
for the use of this term in Zechariah 9–14, one that reveals the influence of
Jeremianic tradition and highlights concern over certain prophetic streams in the
community that produced these texts.
Freeing the Burden of Prophecy 343
minantly the speech of the prophet, although the speech of YHWH is
mixed in with this. Some texts contain specially highlighted citations
of a revelation or plan of YHWH which are particularly bound up in
the process of connecting YHWH’s acts and/or intentions with their
manifestation in the human sphere. The addressee of the text is never
YHWH or the prophet, but rather the entity which is the topic or the
prophet’s own community. Texts are comprised of descriptive (report
or announcement) and/or ordering (command or prohibition) genres.
One group of eleven texts contains both descriptive and ordering and
follows a pattern wherein the descriptive sections include reports and
the descriptive materials motivate the ordering sections of the text. A
second group of six texts contains only descriptive genres with
announcements predominating. Taking both groups together, 75% of
the time a YHWH act is given with its human result. In the other texts
the same connection is made but less explicitly. The commands fall
into two groups according to the speaker with a smaller group not
spoken by the prophet, but by YHWH (one narratological level
removed from the direct address to the readers) and with a larger group
spoken by the prophet (on the primary narratological level to the
readers). These commands fall into two subgroups: summons
(jubilation or communal lamentation) and commands for a variety of
concrete human actions.
Building on this formal analysis, Weis proceeds to Intention. He
observes that the formal aspects “seem to point to a tendency to
connect YHWH’s acts and/or intentions (sometimes as communicated
in a particular revelation) with events in the human sphere either for
the purpose of providing direction (commands) or insight
(announcements of future)†(17).
Weis notes that seven texts (Isa 13; 14,29; 15; 21; 23; Nah 1; Zech
9–11) instruct the audience in certain behavior through commands
and/or prohibitions that are based on an explication of the way that
some expression of the divine will or some act of YHWH manifests
itself in human affairs. Two other texts (Isa 22; Mal 1–3) follow this
pattern though not as explicitly. Five texts (Isa 19; 21; Ezek 12; Hab 1;
Zech 12–14) do not give explicit instructions to the addressees, but
explain certain events in human affairs as a manifestation of YHWH’s
intention, declaration, or act(s) or expound how YHWH’s intention,
declaration or act(s) will be manifested in human affairs. This leads
(17) Ibid., 227.