356 Mark J. Boda 9–14 collection, but in what may be evidence of influence from the crisis reflected in Jer 23,33-40, these ma¢¢ôt are clearly defined as debar YHWH, strikingly similar to the concern over the claims for hw:hy“ ˘ aC;m' in Jer 23, which were shown to distort “the words of the living God, the Lord Almighty”. Zech 9,1; 12,1 and Mal 1,1 echo this vocabulary, making the claim now in the Persian period in the midst of the confusing cacophony of prophetic voices, that actually these prophetic texts are indeed an “oracle” which is the “the word of YHWH”. Rather than a curtailment of prophecy, as argued by Petersen, or even a transformation of prophecy, as argued by Weis, Zechariah 9–14 and Malachi represent a renewal of prophecy along the lines of earlier prophecy. This would explain the fact that the prophetic material in Zechariah 9–14 and Malachi not only utilizes language and forms echoing classic prophecy, but also expects the endurance of the prophetic line founded on Moses and which will endure even through an expected Elijah figure. * ** The prophetic word, denied in the closing phase of the kingdom of Judah, was now not only available but authoritative in the midst of the present prophetic crisis. Therefore, ma¢¢˝’ serves as an editorial marker that in the end bolsters the status of prophecy in the Persian period, rather than sounding its death knell (46). McMaster Divinity College, Mark J. BODA McMaster University 1280 Main Street West Hamilton, ON L8S 4K1 Canada (46) The Zecharian tradition does celebrate earlier prophecy, citing it liberally and playing with earlier images and traditions. However, there is no indication that prophecy has come to an end. Clearly the imposing image of early prophecy is ever present, but this did not mean an end to new revelation. Zechariah 1–6 shows liberal use of earlier prophetic themes, language and forms, but no more than prophets in the “earlier” era.