MALACHI 2
A
Bible Study - Commentary by Jim Melough
Copyright
2002 James Melough
2:1. “And now, O
ye priests, this commandment is for you.”
Unquestionably what is
written in the previous chapter applied also to the priests as well as to the
people, but what is written here was specifically for the priests because it
was their evil example that had corrupted those who looked to them for example
and guidance.
To read this simply as the
record of God’s dealings with the priests of ancient Israel is to miss the
lessons for ourselves that are woven into the fabric of this portion of
Scripture, for we too are priests, as it is written, “Ye are a royal
priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people ....” 1 Pe 2:9, this being
almost the same language as is used of Israel in Ex 19:5-6, “... ye shall be a
peculiar treasure unto me above all people ... and ye shall be unto me a
kingdom of priests, and an holy nation ....”
2:2. “If ye will
not hear, and if ye will not lay it to heart, to give glory unto my name,
saith the Lord of hosts, I will even send a curse upon you, and I will curse
your blessings: yea, I have cursed them already, because ye do not lay it to
heart.”
“If ye will not hear...”
implies that they didn’t even bother to read what God had already written for
their guidance in His Word; and “... if ye will not lay it to heart” indicates
that even when they were aware of what He required of them, they refused to
obey. The first was a sin of omission; the second, of commission, and we
would do well to examine ourselves as to the extent to which we are guilty of
the same sins.
“... to give glory unto my
name” reminds us that God is glorified by our obedience; but dishonored by our
disobedience; and His being “the Lord of hosts” ought to remind us that He has
the power to reward the former, and to punish the latter. Nor should we
delude ourselves that because neither the reward nor the punishment is
immediately forthcoming, that it won’t eventually be carried out. It will!
God’s patience should never be interpreted as indifference either to good or
to evil.
2:3. “Behold, I
will corrupt your seed, and spread dung upon your faces, even the dung of your
solemn feasts; and one shall take you away with it.”
While “seed” may refer to
grain or to children, the latter seems the more likely here. God’s removal of
the priests from office would also include their children, for it was highly
unlikely that those children would be any better than the fathers who were
their mentors.
The sorry state, not just of
apostate Christendom, but of the Church is the graphic evidence of the sad
truth that we have similarly offended the God Who will not bless
disobedience. How many children of Christians are in the world today instead
of in the Church, i.e., are born-again, and therefore in Christ!
“... even the dung of your
solemn feasts,” is usually taken to refer to the intestines and the dung,
which were discarded, and God’s threat to spread them on the priests’ faces
was a metaphoric way of saying that as they the priests discarded this unclean
material, so would He Jehovah discard them, i.e., expel them from the
priesthood.
The clerical system which
rules Christendom, and which has replaced the Spirit-directed activity of the
priesthood of all believers, is the concrete evidence to all but spiritually
blind eyes, that what is portrayed here is but the foreshadowing of what has
happened to the Church.
“... and one shall take you
away with it,” seems to mean that as they carted the dung out to the fields,
so would He have them scattered over the face of the earth because they had
made themselves as offensive to Him as dung is to people. That scattering
occurred in AD 70, and is one from which they will not be brought back until
the Tribulation judgments will have brought a remnant of them, and of the
Gentiles, to repentant faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.
2:4. “And ye
shall know that I have sent this commandment unto you, that my covenant might
be with Levi, saith the Lord of hosts.”
When God’s Tribulation
judgments eventually lead them to realize the enormity of their offenses, they
will then do what they refused to do in the day when Malachi rebuked them,
i.e., admit that their violation of the covenant made with them when God took
the Levites to be His priests, is the cause of His righteous anger against
them. But compounding their violation of that covenant will be the far more
terrible sin of having crucified God’s Son. On that coming day of their
awakening and repentance, there will be no more impudent arguing with God.
They will humbly and sorrowfully admit the justice of their punishment, and
that repentance will secure God’s pardon and the restoration of His blessing.
It is tragic that their stubborn refusal to make that admission has caused so
many generations of them to live and die under the judgment of God Who waits
so patiently to bless them.
2:5. “My
covenant was with him of life and peace; and I gave them to him for the fear
wherewith he feared me, and was afraid before my name.”
Fulfillment of their part of
the covenant that had been made between God and their father Levi, see Nu 18
and 25:10-13, would have secured them life and peace (both of them eternal),
God having entered into that covenant because of Levi’s reverential fear of
Him (reverential awe produced by faith); but with the passing of that early
generation the reverential fear gradually faded, to be replaced with the
brazen contempt that marked their children, the generation addressed by the
prophet being the one that had finally exhausted God’s patience.
This same sad pattern may be
traced in many of our own lives. The love and reverence that marked our
relationship with God in the early days of our new life in Christ, began to
cool, sometimes surprisingly quickly, being replaced with a cold orthodoxy
that maintains an outward form of godliness, but from which is lacking what
God desires most: the loving obedience impelled by continual remembrance of
the price that was paid at Calvary to redeem our souls.
2:6. “The law of
truth was in his mouth, and iniquity was not found in his lips: he walked with
me in peace and equity, and did turn many away from iniquity.”
The priests of that first
generation had been faithful to God, teaching the people sound doctrine, and
being honest in all their dealings with Him and their fellows, with the result
that they walked with God in peace and uprightness, their godly conduct
encouraging many to follow their example, and therefore enjoy the same
blessings. How different it was with those addressed by Malachi!
This was also the happy
condition of the early Church, but sadly it gave place all too quickly to the
dead, cold, loveless, orthodoxy that maintains the outward form, while all
that remains of the inward fire of love is a heap of cold ashes.
2:7. “For the
priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the law at his
mouth: for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts.”
It was the duty of the
priests, not only to teach the people the knowledge of God, but to be examples
also, so that the people would be encouraged to follow their example. Paul
was such a man as is described here, he pleading with those he taught, “I
beseech you, be ye followers of me,” 1 Cor 4:16, but adding in 1 Cor 11:1, “Be
followers of me, even as I also am of Christ.”
Elders and teachers are the
NT equivalents of the Levites, and have the same responsibility, not only to
teach the saints, but to be examples for them to follow, that being possible
only as they themselves walk in the footsteps of Christ.
2:8. “But ye are
departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have
corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the Lord of hosts.”
How different it was with
those addressed by the prophet! They had long since forsaken the path of
obedience, and by their evil teaching and example had led many of the people
also into sin. In doing this they had corrupted (violated) the covenant which
their fathers had entered into with God, the substance of that covenant being
that obedience would secure blessing; and disobedience, chastisement.
That same principle governs
man’s relationship with God in every age.
2:9. “Therefore
have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as
ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law.”
As they had caused God to be
held in contempt by the people, so also had He made them, the priests,
contemptible in the eyes of the congregation. Their being base means that the
people no longer accorded them the honor that attached to the office of priest
when they had obeyed God’s laws, but rather regarded them as common, one of
themselves, as it is written in 1 Sa 2:30, “... the Lord saith ... for them
that honor me I will honor, and they that despise me shall be lightly
esteemed.” That principle still holds good.
Their being “partial in the
law” means that they interpreted and wrested it to accommodate and justify
their own sinful desires.
The pattern is repeated in
Christendom. The disobedience of those professing to be Christians has
brought dishonor to God; and He in turn has caused the so-called “church” and
her “ministers” to be also viewed contemptuously by the people at large, their
estimation of the “church” being expressed in the frequently heard comment
that all the church wants is money.
Christendom has also
interpreted and wrested God’s Word to accommodate and justify their own sinful
desires.
2:10. “Have we
not all one father? hath not one God created us? why do we deal treacherously
every man against his brother, by profaning the covenant of our fathers?”
Some understand the “one
father” to be God; others, Abraham, but the point being emphasized by the
prophet was that whether as descendants of Abraham, or as having been created
by God, they were brothers, and ought therefore to display brotherly love in
their dealings with one another. The gracious spirit of the prophet is
displayed in his including himself as one of them, “why do we deal
treacherously, etc.?”
For comments on the
profanation of the covenant “of our fathers” see verse 8.
The same “treachery” as
marked ancient Israel marks also today’s Christendom whose philosophy is aptly
summed up in the expression “dog eat dog.”
2:11. “Judah
hath dealt treacherously, and an abomination is committed in Israel and in
Jerusalem (Judah); for Judah hath profaned (defiled) the holiness of the Lord
which he loved, and hath married the daughter of a strange god.”
To deal “treacherously” is
literally to be unfaithful or deceitful; and as used here an “abomination” is
something that is disgusting.
Many in Judah and Israel had
been guilty of divorcing their wives, and marrying “the daughter of a strange
god,” i.e., idolatrous pagan women, in spite of the fact that God had
forbidden such marriages, see Dt 7:1-5. The treachery lay in their having
thus violated their marriage vows; and their deceit lay in charging their
wives with fault in order to find a pretext for divorcing them, when the truth
was that the gratification of forbidden lust was the real reason motivating
them.
“... the holiness of the
Lord” is variously translated, e.g., “the sanctuary which He loves,” “that
holy estate,” “God’s holy and beloved Temple,” some maintaining that Israel is
the object of God’s love, a view having validity in view of the fact that
Israel is spoken of as the wife of Jehovah, see Isa 54:5, “For thy Maker is
thine husband; the Lord of hosts is his name.”
While this may be taken to
refer to the profanation of the Temple by the presence of these pagan wives,
it seems that in the present context the reference is more likely to be to the
“temple” of the human body, see, John 2:19-21; 1 Cor 3:16-17; 6:19; 2 Cor
6:16. By these illicit marriages they profaned, defiled, made unholy what God
loved, i.e., them, their bodies dedicated to holiness, that holiness being
preserved in legitimate marriage, the holy estate ordained by God for the very
purpose of preserving holiness, see Mt 5:32: 19:4-12; 1 Cor 7:1-11; Eph
5:23-33.
By marrying heathen women
the Israelites were marring the purity of the Jewish race, God’s earthly
people, for since man and wife are one, that unit now consisted of two diverse
elements, the children of such marriages being also an impure mixture, part
Jew, part Gentile.
The very sin rebuked here is
rampant in today’s Christendom in spite of God’s having forbidden marriage
between a believer and an unbeliever, see 2 Cor 6:14-17; and comment on
today’s divorce rate would be redundant.
2:12. “The Lord
will cut off the man that doeth this, the master and the scholar, out of the
tabernacles of Jacob, and him that offereth an offering unto the Lord of
hosts.”
Translators have been
virtually unanimous in rendering the first part of this verse “May the
Lord cut off, etc” rather than the KJ translation, “The Lord will cut
off, etc.,” thus making it the wish of the prophet rather than his assured
assertion that the Lord would cut off the evildoers. The KJ rendering,
however, seems preferable.
As used here “master” is
literally “one who opens the eyes,” i.e., a teacher; and “scholar” is
literally “to heed,” i.e., the scholar or listener. Those who committed this
sin; those who taught that it was not a sin; and those who believed this false
teaching, would all be cut off, and be left without anyone to present an
offering on his behalf, i.e., he would be left without posterity.
Some understand the latter
part of this verse to mean that the offenders hypocritically presented
offerings to God in the belief that such offerings would secure His blessing,
and such is true; but the meaning is that the priest who officiates in the
presentation of such an offering brought by a guilty Israelite, would also be
cut off, for he should have known better.
2:13. “And this
have ye done again, covering the altar of the Lord with tears, with weeping
and with crying out insomuch that he regardeth not the offering any more, or
receiveth it with good will at your hand.”
The clarity of the NEB
translation makes comment almost unnecessary, “Here is another thing that you
do: you weep and moan, and drown the altar of the Lord with tears, but he
still refuses to look at the offering or receive an acceptable gift from
you.”
It is generally understood
that because of their sin God had withheld blessing: their harvests were
meager; their flocks and herds were reduced in size, as were also their
families; but these and other evidences of God’s displeasure hadn’t awakened
them to their utter sinfulness. They continued the formality of offering
proscribed sacrifices, and foolishly expected Him to bless them in return, so
they thought that by weeping and moaning when they presented their offerings,
God would grant blessing, failing to understand that there must be genuine
repentance evidenced in their forsaking their sinful activities. They were
blind to the truth that God deals in reality. He is angered rather than
appeased by mere cold outward ritual. What He wants is the genuine love of
repentant redeemed hearts whose love is expressed in obedience.
Christendom is guilty of
similar folly, for they too think that they can sin blatantly, and still
secure God’s blessing by observance of loveless outward ritual. They too,
however, will perish.
2:14. “Yet ye
say, Wherefore? Because the Lord hath been witness between thee and the wife
of thy youth, against whom thou hast dealt treacherously: yet is she thy
companion, and the wife of thy covenant.”
“Wherefore” might be
paraphrased, “Why does the Lord reject our offerings?” God’s answer, given
through His servant Malachi, was that He was fully aware of their treacherous
dealings against the wives they had first married. Any pretext furnished
sufficient justification to divorce those wives, when the real reason was that
they had grown tired of them, and wanted younger women. But nothing except
adultery on the wife’s part, see Mt 5:32: 19:9, could justify dissolution of
the marriage bond. Each had chosen his wife to be his lifelong companion, and
in marrying her had entered into an unbreakable covenant to keep that contract
as long as either of them lived.
God’s hatred of divorce will
be better understood if we remember that the marriage bond is a type of that
which unites the Lord Jesus Christ and His Church, see Eph 5:22-33, so that
divorce is the typological declaration of the lie that a believer could ever
be separated from Christ, i.e., that he could lose his salvation.
The care God has for the
preservation of His types may be assessed by the fact that Moses was denied
entrance to Canaan just because he spoiled a type when he struck the rock the
second time, see comments on 1:8.
2:15. “And did
not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one?
That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let
none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.”
The first part of this verse
is the interrogative announcement of the truth that by marriage God makes the
man and his wife one entity, see Ge 2:24 and Eph 5:31. It might be
paraphrased, “Didn’t God make Adam and Eve one person, and what He did with
them He does with every married couple?”
Relative to “the residue of
the spirit” the reference is neither to the Holy Spirit nor to that part of
man which is spirit. The sentence is ambiguous, and is variously translated,
but in the present context the thought appears to be that He Who first created
man has placed in him the ability to reproduce his kind, that ability,
however, being operative only in the union of the man and his wife in
marriage, neither one alone being capable of producing children. “That he
might seek a godly seed” seems to confirm this interpretation, for clearly God
is saying that He desires His people to be godly, so that their children will
be brought up in the nurture and reverential fear of Him, and so be blessed.
“Therefore take heed to your
spirit” is His command to these disobedient people of His to be careful to
maintain that spirit of reverential fear which will ensure the obedience that
will command His blessing, and keep them from disobedience which just as
surely brings chastisement and cursing. There was great need for them to
cultivate that spirit relative to their marriages. They were not to divorce
their wives.
Only the spiritually blind
will fail to see the relevance of this command to today’s Christendom.
2:16. For the
Lord, the God of Israel, saith that he hateth putting away: for one covereth
violence with his garment, saith the Lord of hosts: therefore take heed to
your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously.”
God continues to emphasize
His abhorrence of divorce, that repeated emphasis being designed to impress
upon us the enormity of this sin in His sight.
“... for one covereth
violence with his garment,” is the assertion that he who divorces his wife
“overwhelms her with cruelty” - NEB, the Amplified translation being, “I hate
divorce and marital separation, and him who covers his garments [his wife]
with violence.”
This is related to the
custom in which a man signified his taking a woman as his wife by putting his
garment over her, declaring symbolically that he was taking her under his
loving protection, see Ruth 3:9 and Ezk 16:8. In divorcing her therefore the
man was treating her cruelly, violently, rather than lovingly.
“... therefore take heed to
your spirit, that ye deal not treacherously” continues to emphasize the need
for a man to nurture the spirit of love for his wife, so that other women will
hold no attraction for him, and he will never even think of divorcing her, as
it is written in Eph 5:25-33 “Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also
loved the church, and gave himself for it.... So ought men to love their wives
as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself ... let every one
of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that
she reverence her husband.”
2:17. “Ye have
wearied the Lord with your words. Yet ye say, Wherein have we wearied him?
When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the Lord, and
he delighteth in them; or Where is the God of judgment?”
Their hypocritical words,
which were contradicted by their sinful deeds, had wearied God; yet such was
their lack of spiritual discernment that when told this, they asked
incredulously, “How have we wearied Him?”
The answer returned
discloses how seared their consciences had become. They had long since lost
the ability to discern between good and evil, as is revealed in the fact that
in spite of all their wickedness they imagined themselves to be righteous, for
it was they who did evil in His sight, yet were so blind as to believe that He
still delighted in them!
Their question, “Where is
the God of judgment (justice)?” may have been that of the wicked majority
asking the prophet, “If, as you say, we are wicked, why then doesn’t God
punish us?” but it seems that it is more likely to have been the question on
the lips of the minority, the small godly remnant in the midst of the apostate
mass of the nation. As they surveyed the abounding wickedness on the part of
people and priests alike, they must indeed have wondered, “Where is the God of
justice?”
The same question is in the
minds of many believers today as they survey a world that defies God to His
face, yet has the brazen effrontery to maintain an outward show of religion
which they imagine to be all that is required to avert His judgment upon their
sin. What a terrible awakening awaits the multitudes of them who plunge daily
into hell as death snatches them away from this scene of their careless
occupation with the world’s business and pleasures, and indifference to the
claims of God, while those who remain till the now imminent Tribulation will
experience the terrible outpouring of His wrath that will leave this pleasure
loving world in ruins. The one bright gleam amidst the gloom of that dreadful
era will be that those judgments will awaken some to their need of the Lord
Jesus Christ as Savior, and lead them to trust Him for the salvation of their
souls.
[Malachi 3]