Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Malachi 1:3
And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
3. for the dragons ] Rather, jackals. The unusual form of the word here (fem. instead of masc. as elsewhere) has led many to render, dwellings (LXX. ; and Syr.). But the derivation and meaning are not satisfactory. Rather, with R.V., I made his mountains a desolation, and gave his heritage to the jackals of the wilderness. Unless indeed we neglect the accents and adopt a third rendering, which seems still better to preserve the parallelism, I made his mountains a desolation, and his heritage a wilderness for jackals.
The desolation of Edom here referred to was in all probability caused by Nebuchadnezzar, in fulfilment of the prophecy of Jeremiah (Jer 49:17-22. Comp. Jer 27:3-6). See Obadiah, Introd. pp. 20, 22, in this Series.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
And I made his mountains a waste, and his heritage for the jackals of the wilderness – o
Malachi attests the first stage of fulfillment of Joels prophecy (Joe 3:19, vol. i. pp. 214, 215), Edom shall be a desolate wilderness. In temporal things, Esaus blessing was identical with Jacobs; the fatness of the earth and of the dew of heaven from above; and the rich soil on the terraces of its mountain-sides, though yielding nothing now except a wild beautiful vegetation, and its deep glens, attest what they once must have been, when artificially watered and cultivated. The first desolation must have been through Nebuchadnezzar , in his expedition against Egypt, when he subdued Moab and Ammon; and Edom lay in his way, as Jeremiah had foretold Jer 25:9, Jer 25:21.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 3. And I hated Esau] I have shown him less love; Ge 29:30-31. I comparatively hated him by giving him an inferior lot. And now, I have not only laid waste the dwelling-place of the Edomites, by the incursions of their enemies; but (Mal 1:4) they shall remain the perpetual monuments of my vengeance. On the subject of loving Jacob and hating Esau, see the notes on Ge 27:21-46, and Ro 9:13. Let it be remembered,
1. That there is not a word spoken here concerning the eternal state of either Jacob or Esau.
2. That what is spoken concerns merely their earthly possessions. And,
3. That it does not concern the two brothers at all, but the posterity of each.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
I hated; I loved not Esau or his posterity as I loved Jacob and his posterity: this not loving, comparatively, is a hating, God showed not the same kindness to the twin brothers; the one was more enriched with the fruits of Gods love, and had cause to be thankful; the other had no cause to complain, for God did him no wrong.
Esau; containing his posterity with him; for though the hatred or lesser love began towards Esaus person, yet the effects of it appeared more manifestly in Esaus posterity.
His mountains and his heritage; Mount Seir with the neighbouring mountains given to Esau Deu 2:5; Jos 24:4 for inheritance, as here it is said, and which he and his posterity did enjoy about one thousand two hundred years.
Waste, by Nebuchadnezzars arms five years after the sacking of Jerusalem, as foretold by Ezekiel, Eze 35. The people were slain or captivated, or forced to lice from the sword of the enemy, their cities taken, plundered, and burnt. It is possible that they might meet with worse usage than the Jews met with herein; however, their state seems equal, and here is no token of unequal hatred; but what follows doth manifestly discover it, for whereas Jacobs captivity returned, and their cities were rebuilt, Esaus never were.
For the dragons; or jackals, or owls, for the word is so used and explained by some; or all these with dragons doleful creatures, which delight in desolate places; by which the utter desolation, and the perpetuity of the desolation, of Esau is signified.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
3. hatednot positively, butrelatively; that is, did not choose him out to be the object ofgratuitous favor, as I did Jacob (compare Luk 14:26;Mat 10:37; Gen 29:30;Gen 29:31; Deu 21:15;Deu 21:16).
laid his mountains . . .wastethat is, his territory which was generally mountainous.Israel was, it is true, punished by the Chaldeans, but Edom has beenutterly destroyed; namely, either by Nebuchadnezzar [ROSENMULLER],or by the neighboring peoples, Egypt, Ammon, and Moab [JOSEPHUS,Antiquities, 10.9,7; MAURER],(Jer 49:18).
dragonsjackals [MOORE](compare Isa 34:13). MAURERtranslates, “Abodes of the wilderness,” from anArabic root “to stop,” or “to abide.”English Version is better.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And I hated Esau,…. Or, “rejected” him, as the Targum; did not love him as Jacob: this was a negative, not positive hatred; it is true of him, personally considered; not only by taking away the birthright and blessing from him, which he despised; but by denying him his special grace, leaving him in his sins, and to his lusts, so that he became a profane person; shared not in the grace of God here, and had no part in the eternal inheritance with the saints in light; and likewise it is true of his posterity, as the following instances show:
and laid his mountains and his heritage waste; which, according to Grotius, was done by Nebuchadnezzar, five years after the captivity of the Jews, in fulfilment of the prophecy of Jeremiah, Jer 49:7 but this was done by the Nabatheans n: Mount Seir was the famous mountain that Esau dwelt in, Ge 36:8 there might be more in his country; or this might have many tops, and therefore called “mountains”; and to this account of the waste and desolate state of this country agrees what is at present related of it, by a late traveller o in those parts:
“if (says he) we leave Palestine and Egypt behind us, and pursue our physical observations into the land of Edom, we shall be presented with a variety of prospects, quite different from those we have lately met with in the land of Canaan, or in the field of Zoan; for we cannot here be entertained with pastures clothed with flocks, or with valleys standing thick with corn, or with brooks of water, or fountains, or depths that spring out of valleys and hills, De 8:7 here is no place of seed, or of figs, or of vines, or pomegranates, Nu 20:5 but the whole is an “evil place”, a lonesome desolate wilderness; no otherwise diversified than by plains covered with sand, and by mountains made up of naked rocks and precipices, Mal 1:3 neither is this country ever (unless sometimes at the equinoxes) refreshed with rain; but the few hardy vegetables it produces are stunted by a perpetual drought; and the nourishment which the dews contribute to them in the night, is sufficiently impaired by the powerful heat of the sun in the day:”
Though this country seems to have been originally more fruitful, and better cultivated, as may be concluded from Ge 27:39 but is become so through the judgments of God upon it:
for the dragons of the wilderness; so called to distinguish them from sea dragons, or the dragon fish; such as whales and crocodiles, which are sometimes expressed by the same word here used, Ge 1:21 and these land dragons are no other than serpents of an enormous size. In the Indies they used to be distinguished into three sorts; such as were found in the mountains; such as were bred in caves, or in the flat country; and such as were found in fens and marshes. The first is the largest of all, and are covered with scales as resplendent as polished gold; these have a kind of beard hanging from their lower jaw; their eyebrows large, and very exactly arched; their aspect the most frightful that can be imagined; and their cry loud and shrill; their crest of a bright yellow; and a protuberance on their heads of the colour of a burning coal. Those of the flat country differ from the former in nothing but having their scales of a silver colour, and in their frequenting rivers, to which the former never come. Those that live in marshes and fens are of a dark colour, approaching to a black, move slowly, have no crest, or any rising on their heads p; these creatures commonly inhabit desert places. So Diodorus Siculus q, speaking of Ethiopia, says, it is reported that various kinds of serpents, and of an incredible size, are seen near the desert, had in places inhabited by wild beasts; and Aelianus r describes the dragon as dwelling in woods, and living on poisonous herbs; and preferring a desolate place to cities, and the habitations of men; and when in Scripture it is predicted of countries and cities that they shall become desolate, it is usually observed, that they shall be the dwelling places of dragons, as in
Isa 13:22 so here it is foretold that it should be the case of Edom, as it has been, and still continues to be, as appears from the above traveller s; who, passing through some part of this country, says of it,
“vipers, especially in the wilderness of Sin, which might be very properly called “the inheritance of dragons”, were very dangerous and troublesome; not only our camels, but the Arabs who attended them, running every moment the risk of being bitten;”
so that, according to the prediction, it is now a place for such creatures. A learned Jew t is of opinion, that not serpents, but jackals, are here meant, which are a sort of wild howling beasts, that live abroad in desolate places; [See comments on Mic 1:8] but whether they be the one, or the other, it makes for the same purpose, to denote what a desert place Edom would become; since it should be inhabited by such creatures to dwell in, which denotes the utter desolation made. So the Targum renders it, “into the wasteness of the desert”; or into a waste desert, where none but such sort of animals inhabit. The Septuagint and Syriac versions render it, “into the houses”, or “cottages, of the desert”: and now, though this was the case of Judea, that it was left desolate, yet it was but for a while; at the end of seventy years the Jews returned to their own land, and dwelt in it; but so did not the Edomites, as appears by the following words; which shows the regard God had to the posterity of Jacob, and not to the posterity of Esau.
n See Prideanx’s Connexion, par. 2. B. 3. p. 199. o Dr. Shaw’s Travels, p. 438. Ed. 2. p Harris’s Voyages and Travels, vol. 1. p. 474. q Bibliothec. l. 3. p. 169. r De Animal. l. 6. c. 63. s Dr. Shaw Travels, p. 448. Ed. 2. t Tanchum apud Pocock in loc.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
We now see what I have just referred to, — that the Jews are reminded of God’s gratuitous covenant, that they might cease to excuse their wickedness in having misused this singular favor. He does not then upbraid them here, because they had been as other men created by God, because God caused his sun to shine on them, because they were supplied with food from the earth; but he says, that they had been preferred to other people, not on account of their own merit, but because it had pleased God to choose their father Jacob. He might have here adduced Abraham as an example; but as Jacob and Esau proceeded from Abraham, with whom God had made the covenant, his favor was the more remarkable, inasmuch as though Abraham had been alone chosen by God, and other nations were passed by, yet from the very family which the Lord had adopted, one had been chosen while the other was rejected. When a comparison is made between Esau and Jacob, we must bear in mind that they were brothers; but there are other circumstances to be noticed, which though not expressed here by the Prophet, are yet well known: for all the Jews knew that Esau was the first-born; and that hence Jacob had obtained the right of primogeniture contrary to the order of nature. As then this was commonly known, the Prophet was content to use only this one sentence, Esau was Jacob’s brother
But he says that Jacob was chosen by God, and that his brother, the first-born, was rejected. If the reason be asked, it is not to be found in their descent, for they were twin brothers; and they had not come forth from the womb when the Lord by an oracle testified that Jacob would be the greater. We hence see that the origin of all the excellency which belonged to the posterity of Abraham, is here ascribed to the gratuitous love of God, according to what Moses often said, “Not because ye excelled other nations, or were more in number, has God honored you with so many benefits; but because he loved your fathers.” The Jews then had always been reminded, that they were not to seek for the cause of their adoption but in the gratuitous favor of God; he had been pleased to choose them — this was the source of their salvation. We now understand the Prophet’s design when he says, that Esau was Jacob’s brother, (202) and yet was not loved by God.
We must at the same time bear in mind what I have already said — that this singular favor of God towards the children of Jacob is referred to, in order to make them ashamed of their ingratitude, inasmuch as God had set his love on objects so unworthy. For had they been deserving, they might have boasted that a reward was rendered to them; but as the Lord had gratuitously and of his own good pleasure conferred this benefit on them, their impiety was the less excusable. This baseness then is what our Prophet now reprobates.
Then follows a proof of hatred as to Esau, the Lord made his mountain a desolation, and his inheritance a desert where serpents dwelt. Esau, we know, when driven away by his own shame, or by his father’s displeasure, came to Mount Seir; and the whole region where his posterity dwelt was rough and enclosed by many mountains. But were any to object and say, that this was no remarkable token of hatred, as it might on the other hand be said, that the love of God towards Jacob was not much shown, because he dwelt in the land of Canaan, since the Chaldeans inhabited a country more pleasant and more fruitful, and the Egyptians also were very wealthy; to this the answer is — that the land of Canaan was a symbol of God’s love, not only on account of its fruitfulness, but because the Lord had consecrated it to himself and to his chosen people. So Jerusalem was not superior to other cities of the land, either to Samaria or Bethlehem, or other towns, on account of its situation, for it stood, as it is well known, in a hilly country, and it had only the spring of Siloam, fiom which flowed a small stream; and the view was not so beautiful, nor its fertility great; at the same time it excelled in other things. for God had chosen it as his sanctuary; and the same must be said of the whole land. As then the land of Canaan was, as it were, a pledge of an eternal inheritance to the children of Abraham, the scripture on this account greatly extols it, and speaks of it in magnificent terms. If Mount Seir was very wealthy and replenished with everything delightful, it must have been still a sad exile to the Idumeans, because it was a token of their reprobation; for Esau, when he left his father’s house, went there; and he became as it were an alien, having deprived himself of the celestial inheritance, as he had sold his birthright to his brother Jacob. This is the reason why God declares here that Esau was dismissed as it were to the mountains, and deprived of the Holy Land which God had destined to his chosen people.
But the Prophet also adds another thing, — that God’s hatred as manifested when the posterity of Esau became extinct. For though the Assyrians and Chaldeans had no less cruelly raged against the Jews than against the Edomites, yet the issue was very different; for after seventy years the Jews returned to their own country, as Jeremiah had promised: yet Idumea was not to be restored, but the tokens of God’s dreadful wrath had ever appeared there in its sad desolations. Since then there had been no restoration as to Idumea, the Prophet shows that by this fact the love of God towards Jacob and his hatred towards Esau had been proved; for it had not been through the contrivance of men that the Jews had liberty given them, and that they were allowed to build the temple; but because God had chosen them in the person of Jacob, and designed them to be a peculiar and holy people to himself.
But as to the Edomites, it became then only more evident that they had been rejected in the person of Esau, since being once laid waste they saw that they were doomed to perpetual destruction. This is then the import of the Prophet’s words when he says, that the possession of Esau had been given to serpents. For, as I have already said, though for a time the condition of Judea and of Idumea had not been unlike, yet when Jerusalem began to rise and to be repaired, then God clearly showed that that land had not been in vain given to his chosen people. But when the neighboring country was not restored, while yet the posterity of Esau might with less suspicion have repaired their houses, it became hence sufficiently evident that the curse of God was upon them.
(202) The order of the words in the original gives a peculiar emphasis to the sentence —
Was it not a brother that Esau was to Jacob?
The Welsh will express it word for word —
(lang. cy) Onid brawd oedd Esau i Jacob ?
These two verses may be thus rendered —
2. “I have loved you,” saith Jehovah; But ye say, “How hast thou loved us?”— “Was not Esau a brother to Jacob,” saith Jehovah?
3. “Yet I loved Jacob, and Esau I hated; And I have set his mountains a waste, And his heritage for the serpents of the desert.”
—
Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
The Apostle to the Hebrews explains this account of Esau, who is said to be a fornicator, and a profane person Heb 12:16 left to a dissolute mind, being rejected, or as this scripture speaks, hated of God. And so all his race. For, when it is said, as in this scripture, that his mountains and heritages were laid waste, it is meant spiritually so. As the mountain of the Lord’s house is put for the Church, Mic 4:1-2 so here is meant by the mountain of Esau, the state of reprobation. Esau, and the seed of Esau, void of grace here, and no part in the glory of Christ hereafter. Mount Seir was a type of desolation inhabited, by Esau and his seed. Gen 36:8 .
Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mal 1:3 And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
Ver. 3. And I hated Esau ] i.e. I loved him not as I did Jacob; I passed him by, and let him alone, to perish in his corruption and for his sin. And for his posterity, whereas they were carried captives by Nebuchadnezzar (as Israel also was), I have not turned again their captivity, but laid their land desolate; rased and harassed their cities and castles, made them a habitation of dragons and devils; and all this as an argument of my deep hatred and utter detestation of them. True it is, that Judea lay utterly waste during the seventy years of their captivity; the land kept her sabbaths, resting from tillage. Upon the slaughter of Gedaliah all the Jews that were left in the land fled to Egypt: and God kept the place empty, and free from the invasion of foreigners, until the return of the natives out of Babylon. Now it was far otherwise with Idumea, the desolation whereof is here described to be both total and perpetual, according to that foretold by Eze 35:7 ; Eze 35:15 , O mount Seir, I will make thee to be most desolate, or (as the Hebrew hath it, emphatically and eloquently) wasteness, and wasteness extreme and irrecoverable. A , or utter, ruin, befell that country, being part of Arabia Petrea (hence mention of their mountains), and abounding naturally with serpents, or dragons; it being in the wilderness of this country of Edom where the Israelites were so stung with these fiery serpents, Num 21:6 : hence it became afterwards a very den of dragons lurking there.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
dragons = jackals. Compare Isa 13:22; Isa 34:13. Jer 9:11; Jer 10:22; Jer 49:33; Jer 51:37.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
hated: Gen 29:30, Gen 29:31, Deu 21:15, Deu 21:16, Luk 14:26
laid: Isa 34:9-12, Jer 49:16-18, Eze 25:13, Eze 25:14, Eze 36:3, Eze 36:4, Eze 36:7, Eze 36:9, Eze 36:14, Eze 36:15, Joe 3:19, Oba 1:10, Oba 1:18, Oba 1:19-21
the: Isa 13:21, Isa 13:22, Isa 34:13, Isa 34:14, Isa 35:7, Jer 9:11, Jer 51:37
Reciprocal: Gen 36:8 – mount Seir 1Ki 11:15 – after he had 2Ki 3:8 – the wilderness of Edom Job 30:29 – a brother Job 31:40 – thistles Psa 44:3 – because Psa 68:6 – the rebellious Isa 34:10 – from Isa 34:11 – stretch Jer 10:22 – a den Jer 49:7 – Edom Jer 49:10 – I have made Jer 49:13 – a desolation Jer 49:20 – make Jer 49:33 – a dwelling Eze 32:29 – Edom Eze 35:4 – lay Eze 35:9 – perpetual Mal 1:4 – The people Mat 1:2 – Isaac begat Rom 9:13 – Jacob
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Mal 1:3. Hated Esau means the Lord denied him any special favors, also He chastised him severely for wrong doings.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1:3 And I {c} hated Esau, {1} and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness.
(c) For besides this the signs of my hatred appeared even when he was made servant to his younger brother, being yet in his mother’s belly, and also afterward in that he was put from his birthright. Yet even now before your eyes the signs of this are evident, in that his country lies waste, and he will never return to inhabit it.
(d) Whereas you my people, whom the enemy hated more than them, are by my grace and love towards you delivered; read Rom 9:13 .