Malachi 1:10 Ulasan

Thus prophet is sent first to convince and then to comfort, first to discover sin and to reprove for that and then to promise the coming of him who shall take away sin. And this method the blessed Spirit takes in dealing with souls, Joh 16:8. He first opens the wound and then applies the healing balm. God had provided (and one would think effectually) for the engaging of Israel to himself by providences and ordinances; but it seems, by the complaints here made of them, that they received the grace of God in both these in vain. I. They were very ungrateful to God for his favours to them, and rendered not again according to the benefit they received (Mal 1:1-5). II. They were very careless and remiss in the observance of his institutions; the priests especially were so, who were in a particular manner charged with them (Mal 1:6-14). And what shall we say of those whom neither providences nor ordinances work upon, and who affront God in those very things wherein they should honour him?

In this chapter the Lord declares his love to the people of Israel, and proves it; and complains that the honour due unto him was not given him; which he demonstrates by various instances. The inscription is in Mal 1:1 showing the name and nature of the prophecy; the author of it; the people to whom it was sent; and the name of the person by whom. In Mal 1:2 the Lord affirms his love to the people of Israel, which they called in question; and proves it to be real, special, and distinguishing, by the instance of Jacob and Esau, two brothers; yet one, their ancestor, was loved, and the other hated; which latter is proved by the desolations made in his country, and by the fruitless attempts made to repair and rebuild; which was so clear a proof of the Lord's indignation against him, that the Israelites could not but see it, and would be obliged to confess it, to the glory of God, Mal 1:3 hence he passes on to observe the honour and fear that were due to him as a Father and master, which were not shown him; but, instead thereof, he was despised, and even by the priests themselves, with which they are charged, Mal 1:6 and which being objected to by them, is proved by offering polluted bread on his altar; and by polluting him, in saying his table was contemptible; and by sacrificing the blind, the lame, and the sick, unto him; things which would be justly resented, if offered to a temporal prince and governor, Mal 1:7 wherefore they are called upon by the prophet to pray to the Lord for grace and mercy for the people, seeing it was by their means (the priests) that these things were done; though it was questionable whether the Lord would have any regard to them, Mal 1:9 their sins being so dreadfully aggravated; and particularly, inasmuch as they did not serve in the temple, not so much as shut a door, or kindle a fire on the altar, for nothing, without being paid for it; hence the Lord declares he had no pleasure in them, nor would he accept their offerings; but would call the Gentiles by his grace, among whom his name would be great from one end of the earth to the other; and incense and pure offerings would be offered by them to him, Mal 1:10 and then he renews the charge against them, that they had profaned his name, by saying that his table, and the fruit thereof, were polluted, and his meat contemptible; by expressing a weariness in his worship, and a contempt of it; and by bringing the torn, the lame, and sick, as an offering to him, Mal 1:12 upon which such sacrificers are declared deceivers, and pronounced accursed, which they might assure themselves was and would be their case; since he was a great King, and his name dreadful among the Heathen, Mal 1:14.

Who is there even among you that would shut the doors for nought?.... Either of the temple, as the Targum and Jarchi; for at each of the gates of the temple there were porters appointed in David's time, Ch1 26:1 and who were paid for their service: or of the court, as Kimchi; the court of the priests where the offerings were brought. The words "for nought" are not, in the original text, at the end of this clause, but at the end of the next; and are by some referred to both; and by others restrained to the latter; and who give this as the sense of the words, "who is there", or "would there were any among you?" (f) any good man that would shut the doors of the temple, that so a man might not bring an abominable offering; intimating, that the priests or Levites however, who were porters, ought to shut the doors against such persons; and this way go Jarchi, Kimchi, and Abarbinel; to which the Chaldee paraphrase inclines; which is, "who is there among you that will shut the door of the house of my sanctuary, that ye may not offer on mine altar an abominable sacrifice?'' but the same writers, out of an ancient book called Torath Cohanim, observe a sense that agrees with ours, "a man says to his friend, shut this door for me, he desires nothing for it; light me this candle, he asks no reward for it; but as for you, who is there among you that will shut my doors for nought? or kindle a fire on mine altar for nought? and how much less will ye do freely those things which used to be done for reward? therefore I have no pleasure in you.'' There were four and twenty porters to open and shut the doors of the mountain of the house, or the temple, and the court of women in the daytime; six on the east side; four on the north; four on the south; at Asuppim two and two, four in all; four on the west, and two at Parbar (g): here they attended in the daytime, to keep the place pure and peaceable; and there seems to have been one over all the rest, whose business was to see that the doors at evening were shut by them: in the Misnah (h) we are told that Ben Geber was appointed over the shutting of the gates, i.e. of the temple; and at night there were four and twenty guards also that kept watch; the priests kept guard in three places; in the room "abtines", in the room "nitsots", and in the fire room; and one and twenty Levites; five at the five gates of the mountain of the house, or the compass of the temple; four at the four corners within; five at the five gates of the court; and four at its four corners without; one at the chamber "Corban"; one at the chamber over against the vail; and another behind the most holy place; and there was one that was called the man of the mountain of the house, who every night went through every ward with torches burning before him; and he had power to beat those he found asleep in their watch, and to burn their garments (i), to which the allusion is, Rev 16:15, and these guards, as Bartenora (k) observes, were not on account of thieves and robbers, but for the honour of the house; and these, neither the one by day, nor the other by night, did their work for nought, but had a maintenance allowed them for it: neither do ye kindle fire upon mine altar for nought: and this was done every morning, for though, as one of the Jewish writers says (l), fire came down, from heaven, it was ordered that they should bring of common fire; and there were three piles or rows of fire made every day upon the altar; the first was a large one, on which they offered the daily sacrifice, with the rest of the offerings; the second was on the side of it, a little one, from whence they took fire in the censer to burn incense every day; the third had no other use for it but to confirm the command concerning fire; as it is said, "the fire shall ever be burning", Lev 6:13 (m) and this fire was kindled to burn the sacrifices, the daily sacrifice, and other burnt offerings, for which they were paid out of the tithes, and other oblations; see Co1 9:13 this was an aggravation of their negligence and carelessness about what offerings were brought and sacrificed; seeing they were so well taken care of, and such a sufficient maintenance provided for them; so that they did not the least piece of service in the temple but they were fully rewarded for it; even not so much as to shut a door, or kindle a fire; and therefore it is no wonder their conduct should be resented, as follows: I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts; neither in your persons, nor in your offerings: neither will I accept an offering at your hand: the "minchah" or meat offering, any meat offering, particularly that which was offered morning and evening with the daily sacrifice, Exo 29:40 and it is sometimes used particularly for the evening meat offering, Kg2 16:15 or rather, "a wheat" or "bread offering"; since this offering was made of fine flour, with oil poured upon it, and frankincense put upon that, Lev 2:1 hence mention is made of "incense" in the next verse Mal 1:11; and it was either baked in an oven, or fried in a pan; and either way, when it was brought to the priest, it was burnt on the altar, and was an offering by fire to the Lord, and of a sweet savour to him, when rightly performed; and was a figure of the sacrifice of Christ, which is of a sweet smelling savour to God; and this passage respects Gospel times, as appears from the following verse Mal 1:11, when Christ's sacrifice would be offered up, and so the oblation or meat offering made to cease, Dan 9:27 hence God would not accept of it any more; or else because not rightly offered, as it was not when any leaven was mixed with it, or that and honey were burnt with it; signifying it should be offered with sincerity, and without hypocrisy, and other carnal lusts; and indeed no legal sacrifices were acceptable to God but such as were offered up in the faith of Christ, and with a view to his sacrifice, without trusting to, and depending upon, the outward offering, as hypocrites and carnal persons did: wherefore to this is opposed a pure "minchah" or meat offering in the next verse Mal 1:11; which designs spiritual sacrifices, such as are now offered up under the Gospel dispensation; when offering and sacrifice of a ceremonial kind God desires not; he will have no more offered up; he takes no pleasure in them; they are not acceptable to him, being superseded by the sacrifice of his Son, they were types of; see Psa 40:6 and agreeably to which passages the words may be understood, as expressing the Lord's rejection of legal sacrifices in general among the Jews, which he would have no longer continued than till the Messiah came; by whose sufferings and death the daily sacrifice was caused to cease, Dan 9:27 when sacrifices of another kind should be offered up in the Gentile world, through every part of it, as in the following verse Mal 1:11. (f) "utinam vestrum aliquis", Gataker, Drusius. (g) Kimchi in 1 Chron. xxvi. 1. (h) Shekalim, c. 5. sect. 1. (i) Misn. Middot, c. 1. sect. 1, 2. (k) In Misn. ib. (l) Baal Hatturim in Lev. vi. 13. (m) Maimon. Hilchot Tamidin, c. 2. sect. 4.

"And the offering of fine flour, sirs," I said, "which was prescribed to be presented on behalf of those purified from leprosy, was a type of the bread of the Eucharist, the celebration of which our Lord Jesus Christ prescribed, in remembrance of the suffering which He endured on behalf of those who are purified in soul from all iniquity, in order that we may at the same time thank God for having created the world, with all things therein, for the sake of man, and for delivering us from the evil in which we were, and for utterly overthrowing principalities and powers by Him who suffered according to His will. Hence God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve [prophets], as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: 'I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, My name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure offering: for My name is great among the Gentiles, saith the Lord: but ye profane it.' [So] He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist, affirming both that we glorify His name, and that you profane [it]. The command of circumcision, again, bidding [them] always circumcise the children on the eighth day, was a type of the true circumcision, by which we are circumcised from deceit and iniquity through Him who rose from the dead on the first day after the Sabbath, [namely through] our Lord Jesus Christ. For the first day after the Sabbath, remaining the first of all the days, is called, however, the eighth, according to the number of all the days of the cycle, and [yet] remains the first.

The Jews did return from Babylon, they did recover the city, they did rebuild the temple, and they did offer sacrifices. But it was only after all this that Malachi predicted the coming of the present desolation and the abolition of Jewish sacrifices. This is what he said speaking in God’s behalf: “ ‘Shall I for your sakes accept your persons?’ says the Lord God almighty. ‘For from the rising of the sun, even to its setting, my name is glorified among the nations; and everywhere they bring incense to my name, and a pure offering. But you have profaned it.’ ”

After their captivity in Babylon the Jews did rebuild their temple and restored the place where they were allowed to observe all the rituals according to the law. But now the power of Christ, the power that founded the church, has also destroyed their restored temple. And their prophets foretold this and showed that God would reject Judaism and introduce a new way of worship.

Scripture did not pass over in silence the rejection of the Jews. Notice how the prophet Malachi foretold this too. “Behold, among you the doors will be shut, and fire will not be kindled on my altar for anything.” He also foretold who would now pay God worship. “From the rising of the sun to its going down, my name has been glorified among the nations.” And again he said, “And in every place incense is offered to me and a pure sacrifice.” Do you see how he made clear the nobility of worship? How he showed that the new worship had a special honor and differed from the old? Worship will not be confined to a place or a way of sacrifice, nor will it consist in savor or smoke or omens; it will be a different ritual.

(Verse 10 seqq.) I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord of hosts, and I will not accept an offering from your hand. For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering. For my name will be great among the nations, says the Lord of hosts. But you profane it when you say: 'The table of the Lord is polluted, and its fruit, its food, is despised.' And you have said: 'Behold, we have labored and blown it away', says the Lord of hosts. And you have brought in the lame, and the sick, and you have brought in an offering: will I accept it from your hand? says the Lord. LXX: It is not my will in you, says the Lord Almighty, and I will not accept a sacrifice from your hands, for from the rising of the sun to its setting my glorious name is among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure sacrifice, for great is my name among the nations, says the Lord Almighty. But you have defiled it by saying, 'The table of the Lord is polluted, and its fruit, its food, is despised.' You also say, 'These things are from affliction,' and you scoff at them,' says the Lord Almighty. You bring stolen goods, lame or sick animals, and offer them as sacrifices. Should I accept them from your hands?' says the Lord Almighty. The rule of Scriptures is this: When a clear prophecy about the future is given, do not diminish what is written by uncertain allegories. So now, specifically, the Lord's message is addressed to the priests of the Jews, who offer the blind and the lame and the sick for sacrifice, so that they may know that spiritual victims will succeed the carnal victims. And not the blood of bulls and goats, but incense, that is, the prayers of the saints, are to be offered to the Lord, not in one province of the world, Judea, nor in one city of Judea, Jerusalem, but in every place, an offering is to be made, not unclean, like the people of Israel, but clean, like in the ceremonies of the Christians. For from the rising of the sun even to its setting, the name of the Lord is great among the Gentiles, as the Savior says: Father, I have manifested your name to men (John 17:6). And when, he says, my name shall become great among the Gentiles, oh you princes of the Jews, you have defiled it and continue to defile it. Thus, the prophecy covers both the future and the present time. But therefore, oh priests and princes of the Jews, in every place a clean offering is presented to me, and my name is great among the Gentiles, because you say the Lord's table is defiled, and what is placed on it is contemptible with the fire that devours it. The people, upon returning from Babylon, built an altar made only of random and unpolished stones, according to the book of Ezra (Ezra 1:6), without a temple, without city buildings, without the construction of walls, and they believed that the worship of the religion was of lesser value because it lacked the adornments of the temple. To them, the Lord says: Do you think that the altar and the burnt offerings and the sacrifices placed on it are polluted? Do you also think that the fire, which consumes the sacrifices, is polluted? You do not understand that the almighty God does not seek gold, gems, or a multitude of sacrifices, but rather the will of those who offer. 953. But those who think that the altar should be understood as the table on which the loaves were placed, how can they interpret what follows, when I do not see at all the fire that devours it: for the fire does not devour the loaves of the offering, which were always exchanged for new ones instead of the old ones, and taken away to be used by the priests (Leviticus 2:4). Or certainly it should be understood in this way: You have defiled my name by saying: What good is it if we offer the best? Whatever is offered must be consumed by fire. But the fruit of the altar is fire, and the food of fire is the offerings of the host or the holocaust. And it is not enough that you spoke blasphemy in the previous discourse, but you also said this: 'Behold, we have labored and blown away what we had, says the Lord of hosts.' The meaning of this statement is as follows: You said, 'We have returned from captivity, we have been plundered by our enemies, we have labored greatly on a long journey, we are poor, whatever we could have, has been consumed by the hardships of the road. Whatever we have, we offer.' And by saying this, you have blown away your own sacrifices, that is, you have made them unworthy by my exhalation. Or as it can be read in Hebrew: 'And you have blown me away by saying this.' You have done injury not to the sacrifice, but to me, to whom you were sacrificing. Therefore, I will by no means accept that from your hand, says the almighty Lord. Some think that this is specifically said to the Jews because their offerings are unclean and polluted, and sacrifice is transferred to the Gentiles. It should be understood as pertaining to the priests of the Church who offer sacrifices to the Lord negligently. But if we accept this, then the offerings must be transferred again from the Church to another religion. And just as I read the Gospel, so again what is not yet future will happen in accordance with the Gospel. They also refer to the contaminated table of the Lord in holy Scriptures, if they are understood differently than they are written.

Now I turn to Malachi. This man, prophesying of the church which by Christ’s power has now expanded far and wide, takes on the person of God to say to the Jews: “ ‘I have no pleasure in you,’ says the Lord of hosts, ‘and I will not receive a gift from your hand. For from the rising of the sun even to the going down thereof, my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place there is sacrifice, and there is offered to my name a clean oblation for my name is great among the Gentiles,’ says the Lord of hosts.” Now if we see that everywhere in our time, “from the rising of the sun to the going down thereof,” this sacrifice is being offered by Christ’s priests according to the order of Melchizedek, and if the Jews are in no position to deny that their sacrifices, rejected in the first verse, have come to an end—how is it that they can be looking for another Christ? They read the prophecy; they see its fulfillment before their very eyes. Why can they not realize that he must have been the Christ to fulfill it, since nobody else could?

Lastly, O Jews, if you try to distort these prophetic words into another meaning according to the dictates of your heart, you resist the Son of God against your own salvation.… The house of Jacob or Israel is the same people, both called and cast off—not called in respect to some and cast off in respect to others, but the entire house called to walk in the light of the Lord.… The reason why the house had been cast off was because its people were not walking in the light of the Lord, or some of the house certainly were called and others cast off in such a way that without any separation having been of the Lord’s table as regards the sacrifice of Christ. Both called and cast off were under the same old sacraments, to be sure; both those who walked in the light of the Lord and observed his precepts and those who rejected justice and deserved to be abandoned by it. If you choose to interpret these testimonies in this manner, what are you going to say and how will you interpret another prophet who cuts this reply away entirely, shouting with unmistakable manifestation: “ ‘I have no pleasure in you,’ says the Lord almighty, ‘and I will not receive a gift of your hand. For from the rising of the sun even to the going down my name is great among the Gentiles, and in every place sacrifice is offered in my name, a clean oblation: for my name is great among the Gentiles,’ says the Lord almighty.”

GOD'S LOVE: ISRAEL'S INGRATITUDE: THE PRIESTS' MERCENARY SPIRIT: A GENTILE SPIRITUAL PRIESTHOOD SHALL SUPERSEDE THEM. (Mal 1:1-14) burden--heavy sentence. to Israel--represented now by the two tribes of Judah and Benjamin, with individuals of the ten tribes who had returned with the Jews from Babylon. So "Israel" is used, Ezr 7:10. Compare Ch2 21:2, "Jehoshaphat king of Israel," where Judah, rather than the ten tribes, is regarded as the truest representative of Israel (compare Ch2 12:6; Ch2 28:19). Malachi--see Introduction. God sent no prophet after him till John the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ, in order to enflame His people with the more ardent desire for Him, the great antitype and fulfiller of prophecy.

Who . . . for naught--Not one even of the least priestly functions (as shutting the doors, or kindling a fire on the altar) would ye exercise without pay, therefore ye ought to fulfil them faithfully (Co1 9:13). DRUSIUS and MAURER translate, "Would that there were absolutely some one of you who would shut the doors of the temple (that is, of the inner court, in which was the altar of burnt offerings), and that ye would not kindle fire on My altar in vain!" Better no sacrifices than vain ones (Isa 1:11-15). It was the duty of some of the priests to stand at the doors of the court of the altar of burnt offerings, and to have excluded blemished victims [CALVIN].

God's Love, and the Contempt of His NameMalachi 1:1-2:9 The Lord has shown love to Israel (Mal 1:2-5), but Israel refuses Him the gratitude which is due, since the priests despise His name by offering bad sacrifices, and thereby cherish the delusion that God cannot do without the sacrifices (Mal 1:6-14). The people are therefore punished with adversity, and the priesthood with desecration (Mal 2:1-9).

Mal 1:10. "O that there were one among you, who would shut the doors, that ye might not light mine altar to no purpose! I have no pleasure in you, saith Jehovah of hosts, and sacrificial offering does not please me from your hand. Mal 1:11. For from the rising of the sun to the setting thereof my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is burned and sacrifice offered, and indeed a pure sacrifice to my name; for my name is great among the nations, saith Jehovah of hosts. Mal 1:12. And ye desecrate it with your saying: the table of Jehovah, it is defiled, and its fruit - contemptible is its food. Mal 1:13. And ye say: behold what a plague! and ye blow upon it, saith Jehovah of hosts, and ye bring hither what is robbed and the lame and the sick, and thus ye bring the sacrificial gift; shall I take pleasure in this from your hand? saith Jehovah." The construction מי בכם ויסגּר is to be explained in accordance with Job 19:23 : "Who is among you and he would shut," for "who is there who would shut?" and the question is to be taken as the expression of a wish, as in Sa2 15:4; Psa 4:7, etc.: "would that some one among you would shut!" The thought is sharpened by gam, which not only belongs to בּכם, but to the whole of the clause: "O that some one would shut," etc. The doors, the shutting of which is to be desired, are the folding doors of the inner court, in which the altar of burnt-offering stood; and the object of the wish is that the altar might no more be lighted up, not "by lights which burned by the side of the altar" (Ewald), but by the shining of the sacrificial fire which burned upon the altar. חנּם, in vain, i.e., without any object or use, for Jehovah had no pleasure in such priests or such worthless sacrifices. Minchâh here is not the meat-offering as distinguished from the slain-offering, but sacrifice generally, as in Sa1 2:17; Isa 1:13; Zep 3:10, etc. Such sacrifices God does not desire, for His name proves itself to be great among all the nations of the earth, so that pure sacrifices are offered to Him in every place. This is the simple connection between Mal 1:10, Mal 1:11, and one in perfect harmony with the words. Koehler's objection, that such a line of argument apparently presupposes that God needs sacrifices on the part of man for His own sake, and is only in a condition to despise the sacrifices of His nation when another nation offers Him better ones, has no force, because the expression "for His own sake," in the sense of "for His sustenance or to render the perpetuation of His being possible," with the conclusion drawn from it, is neither to be found in the words of the text, nor in the explanation referred to. God does indeed need no sacrifices for the maintenance of His existence, and He does not demand them for this purpose, but He demands them as signs of the dependence of men upon Him, or of the recognition on the part of men that they are indebted to God for life and every other blessing, and owe Him honour, praise, and thanksgiving in return. In this sense God needs sacrifices, because otherwise He would not be God to men on earth; and from this point of view the argument that God did not want to receive the reprehensible sacrifices of the Israelitish priests, because sacrifices were offered to Him by the nations of the earth in all places, and therefore His name was and remained great notwithstanding the desecration of it on the part of Israel, was a very proper one for attacking the delusion, that God needs sacrifices for His own sustenance; a delusion which the Israelitish priests, against whom Malachi was contending, really cherished, if not in thesi, at all events in praxi, when they thought any sacrificial animal good enough for God. Koehler's assumption, that Mal 1:11 contains a subordinate parenthetical thought, and that the reason for the assertion in Mal 1:10 is not given till Mal 1:12, Mal 1:13, is opposed to the structure of the sentences, since it necessitates the insertion of "although" after כּי in Mal 1:11. It is must more difficult to decide the question whether Mal 1:11 treats of what was already occurring at the time of the prophet himself, as Hitzig, Maurer, and Koehler suppose (after the lxx, Ephr., Theod. Mops., etc.), or of that which would take place in the future through the reception of the heathen into the kingdom of God in the place of Israel, which would be rejected for a time (Cyr., Theod., Jerome, Luther, Calvin, and others, down to Hengstenberg and Schmieder). Both of these explanations are admissible on grammatical grounds; for such passages as Gen 15:14 and Joe 3:4 show very clearly that the participle is also used for the future. If we take the words as referring to the present, they can only mean that the heathen, with the worship and sacrifices which they offer to the gods, do worship, though ignorantly yet in the deepest sense, the true and living God (Koehler). But this thought is not even expressed by the Apostle Paul in so definite or general a form, either in Rom 1:19-20, where he teaches that the heathen can discern the invisible being of God from His works, or in Act 17:23. in his address at Athens, where he infers from the inscription upon an altar, "to the unknown God," that the unknown God, whom the Athenians worshipped, is the true God who made heaven and earth. Still less is this thought contained in our verse. Malachi does not speak of an "unknown God," whom all nations from the rising to the setting of the sun, i.e., over all the earth, worshipped, but says that Jehovah's name is great among the nations of the whole earth. And the name of God is only great among the Gentiles, when Jehovah has proved Himself to them to be a great God, so that they have discerned the greatness of the living God from His marvellous works and thus have learned to fear Him (cf. Zep 2:11; Psa 46:9-11; Exo 15:11, Exo 15:14-16). This experience of the greatness of God forms the substratum for the offering of sacrifices in every place, since this offering is not mentioned merely as the consequence of the fact that the name of Jehovah is great among the nations; but in the clause before the last, "the latter is also expressly placed towards the former in the relation of cause to effect" (Koehler). The idea, therefore, that the statement, that incense is burned and sacrifice offered to the name of Jehovah in every place, refers to the sacrifices which the heathen offered to their gods, is quite inadmissible. At the time of Malachi the name of Jehovah was not great from the rising to the setting of the sun, nor were incense and sacrifice offered to Him in every place, and therefore even Hitzig looks upon the expression בּכל־מקום as "saying too much." Consequently we must understand the words prophetically as relating to that spread of the kingdom of God among all nations, with which the worship of the true God would commence "in every place." בּכל־מקום forms an antithesis to the one place, in the temple at Jerusalem, to which the worship of God was limited during the time of the old covenant (Deu 12:5-6). מקטר is not a partic. nominasc., incense, suffimentum, for this could not signify the burnt-offering or slain-offering as distinguished from the meat-offering (minchâh), but it is a partic. verbale, and denotes not the kindling of the sacrificial flesh upon the altar, but the kindling of the incense (suffitur); for otherwise מגּשׁ would necessarily stand before מקטר, since the presentation preceded the burning upon the altar. The two participles are connected together asyndetos and without any definite subject (see Ewald, 295, a). It is true that minchâh tehōrâh does actually belong to muggâsh as the subject, but it is attached by Vav explic. in the form of an explanatory apposition: offering is presented to my name, and indeed a sacrificial gift (minchâh covering every sacrifice, as in Mal 1:10). The emphasis rests upon tehōrâh, pure, i.e., according to the requirements of the law, in contrast to sacrifices polluted by faulty animals, such as the priests of that day were accustomed to offer. (Note: In Mal 1:11 the Romish Church finds a biblical foundation for its doctrine of the bloodless sacrifice of the New Testament, i.e., the holy sacrifice of the mass (see Canones et decreta concil. Trident. sess. 22), understanding by minchâh the meat-offering as distinguished from the bloody sacrifices. But even if there were any ground for this explanation of the word, which there is not, it would furnish no support to the sacrifice of the mass, since apart from the fact that the sacrifice of the mass has a totally different meaning from the meat-offering of the Old Testament, the literal interpretation of the word is precluded by the parallel "burning incense" or "frankincense." If burning incense was a symbol of prayer, as even Reincke admits, the "sacrificial offering" can only have denoted the spiritual surrender of a man to God (Rom 12:1).) In the allusion to the worship, which would be paid by all nations to the name of the Lord, there is an intimation that the kingdom of God will be taken from the Jews who despise the Lord, and given to the heathen who seek God. This intimation forms the basis for the curse pronounced in Mal 1:14 upon the despisers of God, and shows "that the kingdom of God will not perish, when the Lord comes and smites the land with the curse (Mal 4:6), but that this apparent death is the way to true life" (Hengstenberg). To this allusion to the attitude which the heathen will assume towards Jehovah when He reveals His name to them, the prophet appends as an antithesis in Mal 1:12, Mal 1:13 a repetition of the reproof, that the priests of Israel desecrate the name of the Lord by that contempt of His name, which they display by offering faulty animals in sacrifice. Mal 1:12 is only a repetition of the rebuke in v.7. חלּל is really equivalent to בּזה שׁם and גּאל in Mal 1:6 and Mal 1:7, and מגאל to נבזה in Mal 1:7, which occurs in the last clause of Mal 1:12 as synonymous with it. The additional words וניבו וגו serve to strengthen the opinion expressed by the priests concerning the table of the Lord. ניבו is placed at the head absolutely, and is substantially resumed in אכלו. ניב, proventus, produce, income; the suffix refers to shulchan Yehōvâh (the table of the Lord). The revenue of the table of the Lord, i.e., of the altar, consisted of the sacrifices offered upon it, which are also called its food. The assumption is an erroneous one, that the sentence contains any such thought as the following: "The revenue drawn by the priests from the altar, i.e., the sacrificial flesh which fell to their share, was contemptible;" according to which the priests would be represented as declaring, that they themselves could not eat the flesh of the sacrifices offered without disgust; for they could not possibly speak in this way, since it was they themselves who admitted the faulty animals. If the flesh of blind, lame, or diseased animals had been too bad for food in their estimation, they would not have admitted such animals or offered them in sacrifice (Koehler). Even in Mal 1:13 this thought is not implied. מתּלאה is a contraction of מה־תּלאה (cf. Ges. 20, 2, a): What a weariness it is! The object, which the priests declare to be a burdensome and troublesome affair, can only be inferred from the following expression, vehippachtem 'ōthō. Hippēăch signifies here to blow away, like הפיח ב in Psa 10:5, which is radically connected with it, i.e., to treat contemptuously. The suffix אותו does not refer to אכלו, but to שׁלחן יי. The table of Jehovah (i.e., the altar) they treat contemptuously. Consequently the service at the altar is a burden or a trouble to them, whereas this service ought to be regarded as an honour and a privilege. Jerome thinks that instead of אותו, we might read אותי, which is found in a good number of codices; and according to the Masora, אותו has found its way into the text as Tikkune Sopherim (compare the remarks at Hab 1:12 on the Tikkune Sopherim). But in this case also the reading in the text is evidently original and correct. They manifest their contempt of the altar by offering in sacrifice that which has been stolen, etc. (cf. Mal 1:8). The first הבאתם is to be understood as referring to the bringing of the animals upon the altar; and והבאתם את־המּנחה is to be interpreted thus: "And having brought such worthless animals to the slaughter, ye then offer the sacrificial gift." There is indeed no express prohibition in the law against offering gâzūl, or that which has been stolen; but it was shut out from the class of admissible sacrifices by the simple fact, that robbery was to be visited with punishment as a crime. The reproof closes with the question, which is repeated from Mal 1:8 (cf. Mal 1:10), whether God can accept such sacrifices with pleasure. The prophet then utters the curse in the name of God upon all who offer bad and unsuitable sacrifices.