Criswell Theological Review 2.1 (1987) 63-72
[Copyright © 1987 by
digitally prepared for use at
Gordon and
COVENANT UNFAITHFULNESS IN
MALACHI 2:1-16
GEORGE W. HARRISON
Multiple
transgressions of the covenant are enumerated in Mal
2:1-16. The initial
criticism centers upon the failure of the contempo-
rary priests to preserve the ideals of the
covenant with Levi, vv 1-9.
The latter
indictment features problems related to the family struc-
ture vv 10-16. In addition to the obvious
abuse of the marriage
covenant,
charges are brought against the forsaking of "the covenant
of our
fathers" (v 10).
I. Transgressions of the Covenant of Levi (Mal 2:1-9)
Introduction
The central concept and unifying theme of Mal 2:1-9 is the
violation of
the Lord's covenant with Levi. What is the historical
setting for
such a covenant? There may be found at least two occa-
sions in the Pentateuch for a special covenant
relationship with the
Levites.
When Moses descended from
the Ten
Commandments, he confronted a corrupted congregation
(Exod 32:7-24). But when Moses issued the challenge for
volunteer
executioners, all the sons of Levi came forward. The instructions were
terse and dreadful:
"Every man of you put his sword upon his thigh,
and go
back and forth from gate to gate in the camp, and kill every
man his
brother, and every man his friend, and every man his neigh-
bor" (Exod
32:27, NASB). The toll of casualties was about 3000.
Because of the unsparing zeal of the Levites, Moses announced:
"You
have been set apart to the Lord today, for you were against your
own sons
and brothers, and he has blessed you this day" (Exod
32:29,
64 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
NIV).
Perhaps this event is the historical basis for the covenant
referred to
in Malachi.
Another possible setting for the exclusive covenant with Levi is
found in
Num 3:5-13. After reminding
the
first offspring based upon the Passover event, the Lord com-
manded Moses to number all the firstborn males
among the Levites
(Num 3:15).
A second census was taken of the first male offspring
among the
other tribes (Num
identical.
Then a momentous decision was announced: "Take the Levites
for me
in place of all the firstborn of the Israelites, and the livestock
of the
Levites in place of all the firstborn of the livestock of the
Israelites. I am
the Lord" (Num
family
solidarity of Israelite society, the Levites could serve the Lord
as
proxy firstborn. The support of the Levitical
priesthood with tithes
and
offerings--surely must have been accepted more readily because of
this
explanation. Each Hebrew family unit could declare, "We have a
son in
the ministry of worship."
Valuable insights into the ideal character and conduct of the
Levitical
priesthood are provided by the blessing of Moses in Deut
33:8-11. After very brief statements concerning Reuben and Judah, a
bountiful
blessing is pronounced upon Levi:
Your Thummin and Urim
belong to the man you favored. You tested
him at Massah, you contended with him at
the waters of Meribah. He
said of his father and mother, 'I have no regard for them.' He did not
recognize his brothers or acknowledge his own
children, but he watched
over your word and guarded your covenant. He teaches your precepts to
Jacob and your law to
burnt offerings upon your altar (Deut 33:8-10, NIV).
An analysis of the blessing of Moses leads to a better under-
standing of
the priestly role in
three
features: "Levi is given a place of spiritual leadership with the
functions of
determining God's will, teaching the law, and serving at
the
altar."1
P. C. Craigie provides a helpful
summary:
The blessing then indicates the three principal duties that were
to be
assigned to the tribe of Levi on the basis of their
past actions and
dedication to divine service. (i)
They were to be responsible for the
1 J.
D. W. Watts, "Deuteronomy," Broadman Bible
Commentary (12 vols; Nash-
ville: Broadman,
1970) 2.293.
Thummim and Urim
(v 8), by which the Lord's will would be made
known to the people in matters where decision was difficult to make.
(ii)
They were to have an educational role in teaching the Israelites
the law
of God (v 10a). (iii) They were to be responsible for
system of worship (v 10b). The blessing of the
tribe of Levi consists in
the strength they would be given for these tasks and protection from
their enemies which God would grant to them (v 11).2
Commandment,
Curse, and Covenant 2:1-4
Commandment. The first question facing the interpreter of this
passage is
the meaning of the expression, “And now, this command-
ment is for you, O priests" (2:1, NASB).
Is there a specific command
issued, or
does the prophet refer to all of the instructions contained in
2:1-9?
F. C. Eiselen is representative of the
latter position:
No command of any sort is found in these verses, not even an exhorta-
tion to repentance, though such exhortation is
implied in verse 2; hence
the word cannot be understood in the narrow sense of commandment,
but as meaning purpose or decree. The divine decree, shown by the
succeeding verses to be one of destruction, is for
the priests.3
Typical of those commentators who favor a specific command-
is J.
M. P. Smith:
There is no express 'command' in the immediate context. On the
other
hand, the arraignment in the preceding verses charges that the accused
have failed to honour Yahweh fittingly,
which is their just and lawful
service.
Likewise, in the following verses stress is laid upon the necessity
of glorifying Yahweh. Hence the 'command' is most easily explained
as
the behest to honour Y ahwehwhich
lies behind the whole context.4
Earlier Malachi introduced the concept of God as father: “A son
honors his
father, and a servant his master. If I am a father, where is
the
honor due me? If I am a master, where is the respect due me?"
(1:6, NIV).
Reference here is apparently to the fifth commandment of
the
Decalogue, "Honor your father and your mother, that your days
may be
long in the land which the Lord your God gives you" (Exod
The meaning of «honor" or «glory" in Hebrew includes
weight,
worthiness and
dignity. A son honors his father by remembering that
2 P.
C. Craigie, The
Book of Deuteronomy (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
1976) 396.
3 C. Eiselen, The Minor
Prophets (New York: Eaton and Mains, 1907) 716.
4 J. M. P. Smith, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the
Book of Malachi
(ICC; Edinburgh: T. &
T. Clark, 1912) 35.
66 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
all his
deeds and words reflect upon the father whose name he bears.
He must
strive to be a good representative of his parent.
Curse. Unless the priests respond with total and prompt obedi-
ence to the urgent command of God, a terrible
curse is ready to be
invoked. The
double imperative warns the priests not only to "listen"
but to
"lay it to heart." The glory due to God's great name had been
clouded by
unworthy representatives, the priests.
The combination of cursing and blessing occurs frequently in the
OT, but the
most imposing array of these contrasts may be found in
Deuteronomy 28. The list of blessings (vv 1-14) is followed by an
exhaustive
category of curses (vv 15-68). Surely no more vivid illus-
tration of "cursing your blessings"
could be produced. Did Malachi
expect the
priests to recall this ancient threat?
The "blessings" of the priests may be understood in at
least two
ways.5 Material benefits from the tithes and offerings were brought to
the
Levites because of their service at the sanctuary (Num 18:1-31).
Since no
tribal territory was assigned to them, they were dependent
upon the
gifts of the other tribes (Josh
benefits
would be disastrous.
Another interpretation of the divine threat to curse the priestly
blessings
involves the benediction (Num
were
empowered to pronounce a blessing upon the people of
shall they
put my name upon the people of
(Num 6:27,
RSV). If this privilege is revoked, the priestly prayers are
worthless.
Balaam discovered that the Lord could turn his intended
curses into
blessings for
to
reverse the process, and convert the priestly benedictions into
maledictions?
The curse continues into v 3 with the double threat to
"rebuke
your
seed" and to defile the priests with the refuse of their own festive
offerings. The
precise meaning of both of these threats is difficult to
obtain.
Translations vary widely at this point.
A literal rendering of the MT is: "Behold, I am rebuking for
you
the
seed." The question then arises concerning the literal or figurative
meaning of
"seed." If the reference is to the seed, such as barley and
wheat, the
punishment intended is a diminishing of the produce from
which the
tithe is brought (Lev 27:30). Haggai reminded the people,
"You
have sown much, and harvested little" (Hag 1:6a). A drought or
a
blight could cause the crops to fail, thus serving as a rebuke to the
priests.
5 See
J. G. Baldwin, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi (
Varsity, 1972) 232-33.
The metaphorical understanding of "seed" as offspring is
pre-
ferred by most translations (NASB, NIV, RSV).
Since the priesthood
is
hereditary, the rebuking or rejecting of the descendants would be a
threat most
dreadful. A dramatic demonstration of the power of the
Lord to
terminate a priesthood is found in the case of Eli and
his
unworthy
sons, Hophni and Phinehas
(1 Sam
the
oracle pronounced directly to Eli, but reinforced in a revelation to
Samuel: "On that day I will fulfil
against Eli all that I have spoken
concerning his
house, from beginning to end. And I tell him that I am
about to
punish his house forever, for the iniquity which he knew,
because his
sons were blaspheming God, and he did not restrain
them"
(1 Sam
Some valuable insights into the LXX rendering of the threat
against the
priests are provided by J. M. Kennedy. In an article
appearing in the
March, 1987, issue of the Journal of Biblical Litera-
ture Kennedy writes:
Instead of ga'ar
the LXX presupposes the root gd' ("cut off") and
instead of zera' ("seed"), that is, descendants, presupposes zeroa'
("arm"). This gives the reading, "I will cut off
your arm" in the place of
"I will 'rebuke' your seed." The meaning would be that
the priests will
be rendered helpless and unfit for priestly duty. In reality, the
text may
remain as it is and still suggest the same
meaning as that of the LXX.
Here ga'ar
designates activity that results in the inability of the priests'
descendants to carryon the work of the priesthood.
This does not mean
that ga'ar
means "to make unfit for service as a priest," but it does point
to some kind of activity that produces this result. That activity is
men-
tioned in the next line, namely, "and I
will spread dung on your faces."
Although ga'ar
cannot also be defined as "spreading dung," this activity
forces the priesthood into a situation of
uncleanness and so renders them
unfit to serve.6
The climactic conclusion of the curse sentences the priests to the
most
humiliating treatment possible. Not only are they to be defiled
with the
excrement of the sacrificial animals, but men will carry them
off as
refuse. They will be dumped outside the camp (Exod
29:14;
Lev
Covenant. The closing verse of this passage calls upon
the priests
to heed
the commandment and thus preserve the threatened cove-
nant: "Then you will know that I have
sent this commandment to you,
that my
covenant may continue with Levi" (2:4, NASB). J. Baldwin
6 J. M. Kennedy, "The Root G'R in the
Light of Semantic Analysis," JBL 106:
63-64.
68 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
argues that
the command was meant to lead to repentance and so
make
possible the continuation of the covenant.7 This would be
in
keeping with other prophetic warnings. Eiselen
affirms: "All that
Jehovah will
do or has threatened to do is for the purpose of main-
taining the covenant made in ancient times with
Levi, which de-
manded of the priests holiness and assigned to
them an importtant
place in
the working out of the divine plan of redemption."8
Covenant
Ideals Clarified 2:5-7
This passage contains some of the loftiest ideals of religious
leadership to
be found in Scripture. Life, peace, deep reverence, true
instruction, and
an upright walk with the Lord are featured. Nothing
false came
from the lips of such a priest as this. "He walked with me
in
peace and uprightness, and turned many from sin" (2:6b, NIV).
Where does one find such a priestly model of perfection in
Scripture?
Perhaps Samuel portrays more of these qualities than any
other
individual: "and Samuel grew, and the Lord was with him and
let none
of his words fall to the ground" (1 Sam
judged the
people in a circuit including
(1 Sam
7:15-16). His prayers were powerful, both in war and peace
(1 Sam
7:8-9;
the Lord
and Samuel. Men sought direction from him for a variety of
needs. The
servant of Saul observed: "Behold, there is a man of God
in this
city, and he is a man that is held in honor; all that he says
comes
true" (1 Sam 9:6, RSV).
However, Samuel was not merely a priest. It was in his prophetic
role that
he functioned most frequently.
Ezra may have served as a more recent reminder of the priestly
ideals. His
genealogy is traced all the way back to Aaron (Ezra 7:1-5).
"He was
a scribe skilled in the law of Moses which the Lord
the God
of
hand of
the Lord his God was upon him" (Ezra 7:6, RSV). He
personified the
threefold ideal of studying the law of the Lord, prac-
ticing it, and teaching it (Ezra
entire
assembly to renew the covenant (Ezra 10:1-5). When the walls
built
under Nehemiah's direction were dedicated, Ezra led in the
public
reading of the law (Neh 8:1-8).
Probably no one individual was envisioned by Malachi, but a
composite
figure of all that the Lord intended the priests to represent.
7
Baldwin, Malachi, 233.
8 Eiselen, Minor Prophets, 717.
Such
nobility of character and conduct surpassed the achievements
even of
Samuel and Ezra.
Covenant
Ideals Corrupted 2:8-9
From the mountain peaks of idealism Malachi descends to the
dark
valley of reality. The priests of his day present a revolting
contrast: "But you have turned from the way and by
your teaching
have
caused many to stumble; you have violated the covenant with
Levi" (2:8, NIV). Instead of turning others from evil, they have
swerved from
the straight way. Rather than teaching the truth, they
have led
others into their own perverted lifestyle. Far from preserving
the
covenant with Levi, they have corrupted it.
The ultimate fate of men who have betrayed a position of sacred
trust is
announced: "So I have caused you to be despised and humili-
ated before all the people because you have
not followed my ways
but have
shown partiality in matters of the law" (2:9, NIV). The
hypocrisy of
compromise and partiality produced contempt and deri-
sion.
The words of Jeremiah are appropriate: "Your ways and your
doings have
brought this upon you. This is your doom, and it is bitter;
it has
reached your very heart" (Jer
II. Transgressions of the Family Covenant (Mal
This entire passage is the subject of another article within this
issue of
CTR, dealing especially with the problem of divorce. It may
be
possible to treat separately vv 10-12, interpreting these verses as
providing the
broader foundation for the solidarity of the family unit.
Covenant of
Our Fathers 2:10
The priority of God as father is established first: "Do we not all
have one
father? Has not one God created us?" Any uncertainty as to
the
identity of "one father" is clarified by the parallel construction,
"one God created us." T. Miles Bennett comments:
"God's creating
one
another a new unity. Therefore any offense of one man against
another was
a violation of his relation to God, in whom as their
common
Father their unity was grounded."9
Building upon the foundation of unity, Malachi addresses the
problem of
disunity: "Why do we deal treacherously each against his
brother so
as to profane the covenant of our fathers?" (NASB).
9 Miles
Bennett, "Malachi," Broadman
Bible Commentary (12 vols;
1972) 7.384.
70 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
Is there a specific historical antecedent for the "covenant
of our
fathers?"
At what point in the early history of
binding
relationship established between God and the people, as well
as
among the families of
After the divine proclamation of the Ten Commandments
(Exodus 20)
but before the two engraved tablets were presented to
Moses (chap.
32), specific ordinances were set before the people
(chaps. 21-23). These statutes appear to be designed
primarily to
govern the
relationships among the Hebrew people. At the conclusion
of this
recital, representatives of the people were summoned by the
Lord to
respond: "Moses came and told the people all the words of
the Lord
and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one
voice, and
said 'all the words which the Lord has spoken we will do.'
And Moses
wrote all the words of the Lord" (Exod 24:3-4a,
RSV).
Following the erection of an altar, twelve pillars representing
the
twelve
tribes of
Moses
presided over a ceremony in which "the book of the covenant"
was
central:
Then he took the book of the covenant, and read it in the hearing
of the
people; and they said, 'All that the Lord has
spoken we will do, and we
will be obedient.' And Moses took the blood and threw it upon the
people, and said, 'Behold the blood of the
covenant which the Lord has
made with you in accordance with all these words'" (Exod 24:7-8,
RSV).
Surely this impressive ancient ceremony could constitute the
foundation for
a sacred "covenant of our fathers." Sealed with the
sprinkling of
blood and affirmed by the assembly, its binding power
should be
timeless. (See Heb 9:18-20).
The particular transgression condemned in this verse has been
interpreted from
two very different points of view. First, it may be an
indictment of
individuals within
women.
Second, it could refer to a national cultic involvement with a
female
deity.
Perhaps the strongest argument in favor of the former position is
the
existence of this abuse in the post-exilic community. Ezra vigor-
ously condemned the practice, and demanded that
the men separate
themselves from
their foreign wives (Ezra 9-10).
"Narrowing
now from the general to the particular, the prophet turns
to a
practice which through the centuries had undermined spiritual
life in
cultural
background."10
It is interesting to note that the original Judah, son of Jacob,
married the
daughter of a Canaanite (Gen 38:2). No cultic implica-
tions are suggested, but
executed by
the Lord (Gen 38:7, 10).
R. Smith presents a helpful summary of the evidence supporting
a
cultic or typological interpretation of "marrying the daughter of a
foreign
god."11 J. M. P. Smith argued:
The use of the singular number seems to render it difficult to
under-
stand this as referring primarily to literal marriages between the men
of
Judah and idolatrous women, though such marriages undoubtedly took
place. . . . It is more natural to interpret the statement as meaning
that an
alliance has practically been made between
does not worship Yahweh through the common celebration of such
marriages."12
The experience of
quences of involvement with cultic marriage. The
Moabites invited
the
people of
of Peor. And the anger of the Lord was kindled against
25:3, RSV). The
plague consumed 24,000, and was halted when
Phinehas
plunged a spear into the bodies of an Israelite man and a
Midianite woman (Num 25:7-8). The location of the sacrilege was
"the tent" (NIV) or "the inner room" (RSV).
With this background, Malachi's charge seems to assume some
cultic
implications: "
been
committed in
sanctuary the
Lord loves, by marrying the daughter of a foreign god"
(
The final verdict pronounced against any and all persons guilty of
such
flagrant desecration was to be "cut off from the tents of Jacob"
(v 12). This should discourage others from following the
practice,
whatever its
exact nature may have been.
Transgression of the Covenant of Marriage
2:13-16
Since another article within this issue of CTR provides an in-
depth
exploration of marriage and divorce, only a brief summary will
be
attempted here.
10
Baldwin, Malachi, 238.
11 R. L. Smith, Micah-Malachi (Waco: Word, 1984) 322.
12 R.
P. Smith, Malachi, 49.
72 CRISWELL THEOLOGICAL REVIEW
The concept of a marriage covenant with God as witness provides
an
eternal dimension to the relationship (v 14). The precise formula-
tion of marriage vows is not contained in the
records of the OT. In
the
brief narratives of weddings, little emphasis is placed on the
ceremony
itself. This argument from silence must not be interpreted
to mean
that there was not a religious element in the nuptial cele-
brations. A people in covenant relationship with
the Lord viewed
marriage as a
divine endowment. (See Prov 18:22;
This spiritual dimension should have contributed to the stability
of home
life. The loyalty of each partner to the covenant God was a uniting
bond
which created a lasting companionship between the partners. . . Malachi
is a quiet witness to a mutually satisfying marriage relationship
which,
though begun in youth, does not become jaded
with the passing of
time.13
13
Baldwin, Malachi, 2.39-40.
This
material is cited with gracious permission from:
The
www.criswell.edu
Please
report any errors to Ted Hildebrandt at:
thildebrandt@gordon.edu