Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Malachi 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.
9. been partial ] Lit. had respect of persons. R.V.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Therefore have I made you contemptible – They had said in their hearts Mal 1:7, The table of the Lord is contemptible. So God would requite them measure for measure. Yet not only so, but in their office as judges, against the repeated protestations in the law Lev 19:15, Thou shalt not respect the person of the poor, nor honor the person of the mighty, in righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor Deu 1:17, ye shall not respect persons in judgment Deu 16:19, thou shall not wrest judgment, he says,
Ye have accepted persons in the law – You have interpreted the law differently for rich and poor, or have put it in force against the poor, not against the rich. It would include actual bribery; but there are many more direct offences against equal justice. How differently is the like offence against the eighth commandment visited upon the poor who have real temptation to it, and the rich who have none, but the lust of the eyes!
Crows he condones, vexes the simple dove – That contempt which they cast upon God and His law, by wresting it out of respect to persons, that so they might gain favor and respect from them, so honoring them more than Him, and seeking to please them more than Him, will He cast back on them making them contemptible even in the eyes of those, from whom they thought by that means to find respect.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Mal 2:9
I also made you contemptible.
Pulpits sinking into popular contempt
The priesthood of Israel is referred to. No greater calamity could happen to a community than this.
I. A calamity to all parties.
1. To the priests. Few things are more painful to man than social contempt. It divests a man of esteem, confidence, and influence.
2. To the community. The highest educational instrumentality in a country is that which religious ministers are appointed to employ. In every way they are to cultivate the spiritual natures of their contemporaries. When they become socially contemptible, they are stripped of all power for this. The hearts of the people recoil from them with disgust.
II. A calamity to which the religious ministry is liable. There are moral elements at work amongst the clergy of all denominations which have a tendency to bring about this lamentable state of things.
1. Ignorance.
2. Greed.
3. Bigotry.
4. Sycophancy.
III. A calamity that is manifestly transpiring in our country. The decrease in the numbers of those who attend churches: the growth of a literature in thorough antagonism to the spirit and aims of Christianity: and the fact that the great bulk of the reading and thinking men of England stand aloof from all churches, plainly show that the pulpit of England is sinking into popular contempt. The salt of the pulpit has lost its savour, and it is being trodden under foot with disdain and contempt. (Homilist.)
A ministers inconsistency
A minister of Christ had been preaching in a country village very earnestly and fervently. In his congregation was s young man who had been deeply impressed with a sense of sin under the sermon. When the service was over, he sought the minister as he went out, in the hope of walking home with him. They walked together till they came to a friends house. On the way the minister talked about everything except the subject about which he had been preaching, though he had preached very earnestly, even with tears in his eyes. The young man thought within himself, O! I wish I could unburden my heart and speak to him; but I cannot. He does not say anything now about what he spoke so fervently in the pulpit. When they were at supper that evening, the conversation was very far from what it should have been; and the minister indulged in all kinds of jokes and fight sayings. The young man had gone into the house with eyes filled with tears, feeling as a sinner should feel; but as soon as he got outside he stamped his foot on the ground and cried out: It is a lie from beginning to end! That man has preached like an angel, and now he has talked like a devil! Some years after, the young man was taken suddenly ill and sent for that same minister to visit him. The minister did not remember him. Do you remember preaching at the village of– said the young man. I do. Your sermon was very deeply laid on my heart. Thank God for that, said the minister. Do not be so quick about thanking God, said the young man. Do you know what you talked of that evening, afterwards, when I went to supper with you? Sir, I shall be damned; and I shall charge you, before Gods throne, with being the cause of my damnation. Oh, that night I did feel my sin, but you were the means of scattering all my impressions and driving me into a deeper darkness than I had ever been in before! Minister of Christ! this is a true narrative. It is a common sin. In how many thousands of cases the testimony of the pulpit has been undone by the after conversation by the way, or at the dinner or supper table, only the day will declare! O! the account that we ministers will have to render for the light, frivolous, frothy conversation on such occasions, by which immortal souls have been sent further from God or altogether lost! What eyes have been upon us, secretly taking note of all and receiving from us a deadly influence! What opportunities for God presented and lost by our unwatchfulness and frivolity! Minister of Christ, aim to live out of the pulpit what you have preached in it. If you preach Christ, live Christ. What men hear in the pulpit let them see at the dinner table and the visit. (F. Whitfield.)
Partial in the law.
An evil partiality
The possession of the law was the strength and glory of the Jewish priesthood. They had in it a Divine standard of human action, and it was their duty to maintain its authority, and enforce its requirements. Being selfish and corrupt they made their exalted position the means of gratifying their avarice; the vices of the rich were unreproved, the faults of the poor were severely dealt with. They knew faces (Hebrews). They were misrepresenting the character of God, bringing the law of God into contempt, and ruining the nation.
I. There may be partiality in the law on the part of those who administer it to the people. All righteous law is Divine. The principles of the decalogue underlie all just legislation. Administrators of righteous laws should feel that they are revealing and enforcing Divine, universal, and eternal realities. There should be no respect of persons. Partiality leads to–
1. Loss of confidence in constituted authorities.
2. Rebellion and anarchy.
3. The increase of crime.
Every Christian minister has to bring Gods law into contact with public vices and personal sins. This must be done fearlessly, faithfully, firmly, and impartially. He must not adapt it to mens humours. He must not modify it to hinder its application to offenders of any social grade. He must present it as Gods unalterable standard, not his own. If he is partial in the law–
(1) He will confirm men in their sins.
(2) He will deceive and mislead them.
(3) He will be accounted responsible for their destruction.
(4) He will at last be rejected by God, and condemned by the people.
II. There may be partiality in the law in the estimates of men in social circles. The world is a court of justice. Society is always testing reputations and giving judgments. Men are oftener governed by prejudice than b; the desire to judge righteously. Society often applies Gods law according to its prejudices. Sometimes our application of the law is partial.
1. Because the person judged is, or is not, of the same religious persuasion as ourselves:
2. Because it is our interest either to hide or expose his faults.
3. Because we are already prejudiced favourably or otherwise towards him.
4. Because of his elevated or degraded social condition. This partiality leads to erroneous impressions, misrepresentations, unjust actions, and bitter feelings.
III. There may be partiality in the law in its application to ourselves. Men deal tenderly with their own sins. They hold the mirror of the law so as not to reveal them. They are willing to apply those commandments that do not condemn their particular vices. Faithful application of the law is seldom made. This is the cause of much ignorance of ourselves, much vanity and self-conceit, much folly and self-deception, much cherishing of sin, and persistence in it. By an impartial application of the law our sins are discovered, and we are led to Christ that they may be taken away. (W. Osborne Lilley.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 9. Therefore have I also made you contemptible] The people despised you because they saw that you acted contrary to your functions. This has happened repeatedly since, to several classes of priests. Not maintaining, by purity of life and soundness of doctrine, the dignity of the ministerial function, they became contemptible before the people; their meager preaching was disregarded, and their persons at last cast out as a general loathing to the universe! See what happened to the truly abominable priesthood of France and Rome 1796-8. They were the sole cause of that infidelity that brought about the revolution. They are now partially restored; and are endeavouring to supply by grimace, paltry superstition, and jesuitical cunning, what they want in purity of morals, soundness of doctrine, and unction from God. They must mend, or look for another revolution. Mankind will no longer put up with the chaff of puerile and fanatical ceremonies in place of the wheat of God’s word and worship.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Therefore, because you have corrupted the covenant of Levi, and have dishonoured me, and made my sacrifices contemptible,
have I also made you contemptible and base; I have left you under the contempt of the people, who think basely of you, as you deserve; you have dishonoured me, and I have made, and will make, good my word, you shall be lightly esteemed.
Before all the people; there are none but account you an unworthy, unthankful, profane, and unjust generation, neither fit to serve God nor guide man.
According as ye have not kept my ways; your punishment is as your sin; you forsook the law of God, and made his table and his bread contemptible, now I make you contemptible; you were weary of my service, and the people age weary of such priests.
But have been partial in the law; you have perverted the law to please great men, or to favour yourselves; or, to speak all in few words, you have declined the true judgment of Gods law to serve some unworthy design or other. so that none could be sure of a right interpretation, or of a just judgment, or of a safe and sure direction from you.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9. Because ye do not keep thecondition of the covenant, I will not fulfil the promise.
partial in the lawhavingrespect to persons rather than to truth in the interpretation andadministration of the law (Le19:15).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base,…. When their city and temple were destroyed by the Romans, and they were carried captive by them, and became a taunt and a proverb in all places where they came:
before all the people; the nations of the world, among whom they were scattered:
according as ye have not kept my ways; neither those which the law directed to, either moral or ceremonial; nor what the Gospel directed to, the ordinances and institutions of Christ, particularly baptism, which the Jews rejected against themselves, Lu 7:30:
but have been partial in the law; in the observance of it, attending to the lesser, and taking no notice of the weightier matters of it, as the Jews are charged by Christ, Mt 23:23 and in the interpretation of it, restraining its sense only to outward actions, for which they are reproved, Mt 5:1 or “received faces”, or “accepted persons in the law” x; in matters of the law they were concerned in, they had respect to the persons of men, by giving the sense of it, and pronouncing judgment, in favour of some, to the prejudice of others, wrongly.
x “et accepistis faciem in lege”, Pagninus; “assumentes facies”, Montanus; “suscipitis faciem”, Piscator; “accipitis faciem”, Cocceius; “et ferentes faciem in lege”, Burkius.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
The Prophet draws this conclusion — that the priests in vain gloried in the honor of their office, for they had ceased to be the priests of God. We may now return to the main point.
We perceive what the subject is which the Prophet handles here: as the priests sought by a peculiar privilege to exempt themselves from all reproof, he assails them in particular; for teaching would have been useless as to the common people, except the priests themselves were brought to order. The priests no doubt flattered the people, and thus attempted to deprive the Prophets of every respect, in order that their doctrine might produce no effect. This is the reason why our Prophet so sharply reproves them. But we must consider the state of the case. The priests said that they had been set, by divine authority, over the whole Church, and that they could not be deprived of that honor which they had received from God. They however took only but one part of the covenant, and yet sought to deprive God of his right. The Prophet here answers them — that God had indeed favored them with no common honor in appointing them the priests of his Church, but that the compact, which included a mutual stipulation, was at the same time to be considered; for God had not simply appointed them the guides of his Church, but had also added a condition.
We hence see that the hinge of the matter was, that the priests presumptuously and absurdly laid hold on what favored only their own cause, and at the same time passed by and cunningly overlooked the chief thing — that the priesthood was connected with the worship of God. Now had they attained what they wished, there would have been no God in the Church, but they would have exercised over it a tyrannical power. But it has ever been, and is still the will of God, to retain the supreme power over mortals in his own hand.
Having now seen the design of the Prophet, we may easily perceive the import of the whole subject. But before we proceed farther, we must first observe, that we have here described to us the character of true and legitimate priests; for the Prophet not only speaks of the office of priests, but sets before us a living image in which we cannot be deceived: and hence all who are engaged in the pastoral office may know what God requires from them. I will only just mention what he first says — that God gave fear to priests; for I have already given a sufficient explanation of this by saying, that priests are not to abuse their right, as though the highest power were granted to them; for God will not have his Church subject to tyranny, but his will is to reign alone in it through the ministry of men. The main thing then to be borne in mind is this — that a rule is prescribed to priests, that though they preside and possess the first rank of honor among the people, it is yet under certain conditions.
We shall now consider only this which the Prophet says — that Levi faithfully and sincerely performed his office, because the law of truth was in his mouth, and no iniquity was found in his lips; to which we ought yet to add the general truth which immediately follows — that the priest’s lips ought to keep knowledge. It is then a law which cannot be abolished, that those who are priests or pastors in the Church are to be teachers. And not unwisely does Gregory apply a custom under the law to this subject; for we know that appended to the priest’s dress were bells; and it is distinctly commanded by Moses, that the priest should not go forth without this sound, (Exo 28:35.) Gregory, as I have said, accommodated this to teaching — “Woe,” he says, “to us, if we go forth without sound, that is, if we boast that we are pastors, and in the meantime are dumb dogs; for nothing is less tolerable than that he who speaks not in the Church and whose voice is not clearly heard to the edification of the people, should be deemed a pastor.” This is what a Roman Pope has said. Let those who now proudly and confidently boast themselves to be his successors, at least give the sound, and let us hear what they teach: but as their whole power is exercised in cruelty, it is evident how faithfully they keep God’s covenant! But I now return to the words of the Prophet.
He says, that this law has been fixed by God, and that it cannot be nullified by any decrees or customs of men, — that the priest is to keep knowledge in his lips. He farther explains himself by showing that the priest is to be the keeper of knowledge, not that he may reserve it for himself, but that he may teach the whole people: they shall seek, he says, the law from his mouth; and afterwards he confines knowledge to true doctrine, as it was to flow from the law of God, the only true fountain of truth; for he had said, that the law of truth was in the mouth of Levi. It would not then be enough for one to have his mouth open and to be prepared to teach others, except purity of doctrine be retained. We hence see, that not only teaching is required from priests, but pure teaching, derived from the very mouth of God, according to what is said in Eze 3:17,
“
Thou shalt receive from my mouth the word, and shalt declare it to them from me.”
God shows there that the Prophets had no such authority as that they could bring forth anything they pleased, or what they thought would be right, but that they were so far faithful teachers as they were his disciples alone: hence he bids him to seek the word from his mouth; and then he adds, “Thou shalt declare it to them from my mouth.” So also it is said in Jer 23:28,
“
What is the chaff to the wheat? The Prophet who has a dream, let him declare his dream; but he who has my word, let him declare my word faithfully.”
Here God limits and defines the prophetic right, as though he had said, that the Prophets were not appointed, that they might bring anything indiscriminately, but that each, according to the measure of what was revealed to him, might faithfully dispense, or deliver, as it were from hand to hand, what he had received from heaven: for by mentioning two things, it was God’s design to show that no doctrine is to be allowed, except what he himself has revealed; and he compares to chaff whatever men devise themselves, while the pure doctrine of the law is to be regarded as the wheat. This is then the second thing to be noticed in what the Prophet says in this passage: but we must also consider the last thing — that the priest is the messenger of the God of hosts.
This seems to have been said in honor of the priesthood; but the Prophet means that priests have nothing of their own or separate from God, and that whatever reverence is due to them ought to be referred to God himself, whose ministers they are. I have said that he reasons from the definition itself, as though he had said, that every one who would be a priest must also be a teacher. But we must also observe, that there is an implied comparison between God and priests, as though he had said, “Priests can claim nothing for themselves, but as interpreters of God.” Hence, the plain conclusion is, that the priesthood takes away nothing from God’s authority.
We now see that the Prophet includes in these few words two things of great importance — that there is no priesthood without doctrine or teaching, and no priest except he who faithfully performs his office as a teacher: and secondly, that God resigns not his own right and power when priests are set over the Church; for God commits to them the ministration only, and on this condition, that the authority remains in himself alone; for otherwise the priest would not be the messenger of the God of hosts. Among other things the Prophet requires also this of the priests — that they sincerely perform their duties. We indeed know that many apparently discharge their office, and excel in teaching, and carefully apply to their duties; but ambition stimulates some and avarice others. Hence the Prophet lays down another condition — that they are to walk in uprightness before God; that is, that they are not only to satisfy men, or to catch at the applause of the world, but to discharge their office with a pure conscience.
Thus have I shown that there is here set before our eyes a pattern by which we may know what God requires from us when he makes us pastors over his Church.
Now follows a reprobation of their conduct, for the Prophet says, Ye have departed from the way. Since he so boldly chastises the priests, we hence learn that they were subject to reproof; and nothing is more unreasonable than that the Papal clergy should seek to be exempt from every law and discipline, for the priests are here called to order, that they might know their own faults: Ye have departed, he says, from the way, and then, ye have made many to err in the law. This second thing being added, the priests ought by no means to be spared. When they sin only privately, though they may by bad examples corrupt the Church, yet this may somehow be borne with; but when they corrupt and deprave sound doctrine, when they subvert the order laid down in the law, they deserve no indulgence. This is the reason why Malachi so severely and so boldly reproves them.
He at last adds, Ye have therefore violated the covenant. This third clause may indeed be explained in two ways, — that the Prophet proceeds with his reproof, or that he draws a conclusion from the preceding clauses, — that they were deservedly stripped of all honor, because they stood not to the covenant. Now this latter exposition is the most suitable, according to what I have already stated. He then as I have said, draws this conclusion, that their boasting was foolish, that they in vain said that they were a holy tribe whom God had chosen to be a peculiar possession to himself, for he says that the covenant of Levi had been violated by them; and this clause is set in opposition to the former, in which he says, ye shall know that my covenant was with Levi. We said then that the unfaithful ever contrive some disguise when they are reproved, as though they would deprive God of his right: so the Levitical priests said, that what God had once established could not be made void. Under this pretext, that they were of the holy tribe, they sought to be deemed holy; the Prophet then said to them, ye shall know that God’s covenant is holy, and that ye are not holy. So also in this place, Ye have violated (222) the covenant of Levi, that is, “ye in vain pretend that you have been chosen by God, and that the honor of your priesthood has been confirmed to you; for God intended that his law, laid down by himself, should be kept. As then ye have violated the covenant of Levi, ye are no more Levites; as ye are become degenerated children, your inheritance is rightly taken away from you, and ye are deprived of the honor of the priesthood.
And corresponding with this view is what follows, And I have already rendered (or, will render) you despicable and base to the whole people, (223) as ye have not kept my ways and had respect of persons in the law (224) God first shows that he was now bound by no law, so that he would not cast away these unfaithful priests who had broken his covenant. He also adds, that they had respect to persons in the law, for they coveted gain, and therefore turned to gratify men, and corrupted the whole truth of religion; and this is indeed a necessary consequence, when ambition or avarice bears rule, there can then be no sincerity, and the teaching of true religion will be adulterated. I cannot now finish. We shall consider tomorrow the difference between the ancient priesthood and that of the Christian Church.
(222) The verb means to corrupt, and also to destroy or to make void. The Septuagint give the first meaning, “ye have corrupted — διεφθείρατε,” and Jerome the second, “ye have made void — irritum fecistis.” Marckius and Henderson have the first word, and Newcome the second, which is more suitable when applied to a covenant, though not when applied to “ways.” To “make void,” is also the most appropriate when it refers to wisdom, as in Eze 32:7. — Ed.
(223) Striking and remarkable are the words of Adam Clarke on this verse, “See what happened to the truly abominable priesthood of France and Rome, 1796-8. They were the sole cause of that infidelity that brought to supply by grimace, paltry superstition, and jesuitical cunning, what they want in purity of morals, soundness of doctrine, and unction from God. They must mend, or look for another revolution. ”
(224) “Having one decision for the poor and another for the rich. See Lev 29:15.” — Newcome; or, as Jerome says, “Despising the just when poor, and honoring the unjust when rich.” — Ed.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(9) Therefore.I am no longer bound by the covenant I made with the tribe of Levi, and, instead of life and peace, I give you contempt, &c.
In the lawi.e., in the administration of justice. The authority of the priests, Levites, and of the judges of the day, in all matters ceremonial and civil, is expressly inculcated by Deu. 17:8-13. It was in accordance with this passage that our Lord said (Mat. 23:2): The scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses seat; all, therefore, whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do, &c.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
9. He must cut them off, though the covenant itself must continue; a priesthood of a different character must be substituted (see on Mal 2:4).
Therefore have I also The contrast would be brought out more forcibly by rendering, “Therefore I on my part have” (compare Amo 4:6).
Made you contemptible and base In view of Mal 2:2-3 the tenses should be interpreted as prophetic perfects; Jehovah will surely bring them into contempt by refusing to accept and bless their ministrations (Mal 1:9-10). When people find out that the priests have lost the divine favor they will heap upon them the ignominies described in Mal 2:3. The present attitude of Jehovah is the beginning of the fulfillment of the curse.
Before all the people Who now look upon them as their spiritual guides.
According as The judgment will be according to the lex talionis. As they have despised Jehovah (Mal 1:6-7; Mal 1:12), so they will be despised by the people.
Ye have not kept my ways The ways marked out by Jehovah, which are uprightness in life and teaching (Mal 2:6); from these they have swerved (Mal 2:8).
Have been partial in the law This is only one of their many crimes (compare Mal 1:6-14). In the law means in the administration or exposition of the law. How this partiality showed itself is not stated, but a passage like Mic 3:11 (compare also Mal 2:5) may suggest how it was done. The same passage makes it also probable that the statements should not be restricted to decisions in legal disputes. Marti, following Torrey, thinks that this last accusation is out of place, since in the chief condemnation (Mal 1:6-14) nothing has been said about partiality in the exposition or administration of the law. By omitting one letter and changing one vowel point he secures a text that may be translated, “and have not had regard for me in the law”; the last two clauses, “according as ye have not kept my ways, nor have had regard for me in the law.” A similar expression occurs in Mal 1:8, translated “accept your persons”=have regard for your persons. The emendation improves the text, but this in itself is not conclusive evidence that it restores the original reading.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Mal 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.
Ver. 9. Therefore have I also made you contemptible, and base ] And so have cried quittance with you and returned you your own with usury. God loves to retaliate, and to proportion jealousy to jealousy, provocation to provocation, Deu 32:21 , frowardness to frowardness, Psa 18:26 , contrariety to contrariety, Lev 26:18 ; Lev 26:21 , contempt to contempt, 1Sa 2:30 , and here. How these unworthy priests had slighted God, and exposed his name and service to contempt and obloquy, hath been before set forth sufficiently. And now it is come home to them. It was threatened before, Mal 2:3 , See Trapp on “ Mal 2:3 “ and now it is executed. Graceless men are apt to imagine that God threateneth in terrorem in fear only; and are ready, with those miscreants in the Gospel, to say, God forbid; we hope he will be better than his word, and not be so unmerciful as the preachers would make him. They believe the predictions of Scripture but as they believe the predictions of an almanack, which saith, such a day will be rain, and such a day wind; men think it may come to pass, and it may be not. But shall God say the word, and not see it fulfilled? Is not his dicere to say his facere? do do, his word his deed? Yea, doth be not sometimes, dicto citius, by saying more quickly, break out upon his enemies, as he did upon Nadab and Abihu, Nebuchadnezzar, Herod, &c. God had poured contempt already upon these degenerate priests. And the like he had threatened to those, Jer 23:40 : see Mic 3:7 Zec 13:4 . Ribera upon this text bewails the business in their Romish clergy, now become despicable by reason of their evil manners. Petrarch complained long before that the stench of that sink, the court of Rome, was come up to heaven. Erasmus laid them open in their colours, and did them more mischief iocando, by his jeering and jesting at them, than Luther did stomachando, by dry blows and invectives, as one well observeth. He made the world look up that had been long lulled asleep, and take notice of the truth of that which Chrysostom had long before discovered and lamented: Multi sacerdotes, et pauci sacerdotes; multi in nomine, pauci in opera. There are many priests, and yet but few many so in name, few so indeed. Fie on such rascal ribalds, a said the excommunicated barons in King John’s time (in their declaration), concerning the Pope and his Cardinals, and yet they were no Protestants. No more are the Venetians; and yet how they slight their Pope (who is now, like the cuckoo in June, heard, but not regarded, by them) is sufficiently manifested by their manifestos to the Christian world. In Biscany (anciently Cantabria), a province of Spain, they admit no bishops to come among them; such a hatred they have taken against that order of men. And when King Ferdinand came in progress thither, accompanied, among others, by the Bishop of Pampeluna, the people arose in arms, drove back the bishop, and, gathering all the dust on the which they thought he had trodden, flung it into the sea. What our bishops did in Queen Mary’s days we all know; that bloody Bonner especially, buried at length in a dunghill (too good a grave for him). Sure it was an unhappy proverb that was then learned, The bishop’s foot hath trodden here. They are now utterly cashiered, and lie wrapped up in the sheet of shame for this sin (among others) here charged upon these priests, their dishonouring God’s great name, his services and servants. For it was come to that height of wickedness among us, a little before the late troubles, as to cast odium in religionis professores tanquam in adversaries, an evil report upon the professors of religion, as so many adversaries, as Redo saith the ancient Britons did immediately before their destruction by the Saxons. He that would not be an Arminian was therefore accounted a practical Puritan. He that was not for the iure divino by divine law of episcopacy, was little better than a public enemy. If the ministry of England be under any abuses at present, as they are through the iniquity of the times, and the overflow of errors and atheism, let it serve to humble them for their desire of vain glory, and not seeking the honour that cometh from God only, Joh 5:44 ; let it also work in them a greater care to approve themselves to God, that they may be glorious in his eyes and to his people, who dare not but honour such as fear the Lord, Psa 15:4 , and have his ministers in singular esteem for their work’s sake, 1Th 5:13 .
According as ye have not kept my ways
But have been partial in the law
a A person of abandoned character; a wicked, dissolute, or licentious person. D
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
People = peoples: i.e. the tribes.
according as = because, or, in so far as.
been partial = had respect of persons. Compare Jam 2:4.
in = in [administering) the law.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
made: Mal 2:3, 1Sa 2:30, Pro 10:7, Dan 12:2, Dan 12:3, Mic 3:6, Mic 3:7
before: 1Ki 22:28, Jer 28:15, Jer 28:16, Jer 29:20-22, Jer 29:31, Jer 29:32, Eze 13:12-16, Eze 13:21, Mar 7:13, Mar 7:14, Luk 20:45-47
but: Mal 2:8, Mat 5:21, Mat 5:22, Mat 5:27, Mat 5:28, Mat 5:33-37, Mat 5:43, Mat 5:44, Mat 19:17, Mat 19:18, Mat 23:16-24, Mar 7:8-13, Luk 10:29, Luk 11:42, Rom 7:7-10
have been partial in: or, lifted up the face against, Heb. accepted faces. Deu 1:17, *marg. Gal 2:6
Reciprocal: Deu 17:11 – According to 2Ki 5:27 – leprosy 2Ki 23:9 – the priests Ezr 10:18 – the sons Job 13:8 – General Pro 6:35 – regard Pro 12:8 – he Isa 9:15 – the prophet Lam 2:6 – the king Eze 44:12 – they ministered Hos 4:6 – I will also reject Hos 4:7 – therefore Nah 3:6 – make Mal 1:6 – if then Mat 5:19 – shall teach Mat 22:16 – neither Luk 15:15 – to feed 1Ti 5:21 – partiality Jam 2:4 – partial Jam 3:17 – without
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Mal 2:9. The priesthood was an important and dignified office and should have been respected by the people. But the corruptions that were allowed to creep into the service had lowered the priests in the eyes of all people.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Since the priests had despised the Lord, the Lord had made them despised in the eyes of the people. They did not obey His will but had told the people what they wanted to hear. Their penalty should have been death (Num 18:32).
Thus ends the first hortatory discourse in Malachi. This one, addressed specifically to Israel’s unfaithful priests, should challenge all God’s servants to serve Him with heartfelt gratitude for His grace and with the awareness that He will punish unfaithful workmen.