Malachi

OR, THE STATE OF THINGS AT THE END.

By Edward Dennett

Chapter 1

 

THE law and the prophets, we read, were until John; and the Baptist indeed closed up the dispensation of which they were the expressions, inasmuch as he was the fore-runner of the Messiah Himself. But Malachi¹ was the last of the prophets, the last canonically (for if there were any after him, their prophecies have not been preserved), and the last morally; for he testifies of the coming of the Lord, and of the shining forth of the Sun of Righteousness with healing in His wings. His prophecies therefore have a grave and solemn importance, and on two accounts. First, as showing the state of the remnant who, in the tender mercy of God, had been brought back from Babylon that He might declare His faithfulness, and fulfil His purpose in the presentation of Messiah to His people; and secondly, because of the correspondence of the position of this remnant with that of God's people at the present moment. As there was nothing between them, so there is nothing to intervene between ourselves, and the expectation of the Lord's return. The message to them was, "The Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to His temple;" to us it is, "Behold, I come quickly." Whether there is any similarity in our moral condition to theirs, it will be for our consciences to detect as we ponder the revelations found in the book, and the instruction it affords. One other preparatory remark may be made. Though all the people addressed were the descendants of those who had returned from captivity, and all alike were in fact on the ground. of, as well as actually by descent, God's people, yet a remnant is discerned in the midst of this remnant, and it is these alone who meet the mind of the Lord. (See especially Mal. 3:14-18) The book has therefore a special voice in a day like this for those who have been brought out from the corruptions of Christendom, and for those amongst them whose one desire is to be found keeping the word of Christ, and not denying His name.

There is something almost sublime in the simple and emphatic way in which the book commences.

"The burden of the word of the Lord to Israel by Malachi. I have loved you, saith the Lord." (vv. 1, 2.)

Whatever the state of His people, the Lord never forgets, and never hesitates to declare, His love for them. it is in this way indeed that He brings their true condition to light. We might have supposed that the first word would be one of warning and rebuke on account of their sins; but no, God's first word is one that ought to have recalled the length and breadth, the depth and height, of that unchanging love which had flowed out in the activities of His mercy and grace from the call of Abraham until now. It is so also in the epistles. The heart of God for His saints is always displayed before the needed admonitions and corrections are given. As we read in another prophet, "I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with loving-kindness have I drawn thee." (Jer. 31:3.) We are thus brought face to face with the source of our redemption, and of all the blessings we enjoy; for we cannot be too often reminded that we do not belong to the Lord because we love Him, but because He has loved us and made us what we are. (Cp. 1 John 4:9-10; Rev. 1:5-6; Deut. 7:6-8, &c.)

With this simple declaration of Jehovah's love the state of the people immediately appears in their response, "Wherein hast thou loved us?" the expression of a moral insensibility, as well as of spiritual blindness, which is their characteristic in this prophecy. Blind indeed they must have been to question the truth of Jehovah's love; for had they not the records of the wonders He had wrought in their redemption, in the guidance of their fathers through the wilderness, in dispossessing the heathen and setting them in a land flowing with milk and honey? And was not their own position at that moment the proof of it. Ah! but they would have probably said, "If the Lord loves us, why have we suffered chastisement and judgment, and why are we now so feeble and impoverished?" This is but a common deception which souls in every age practise upon themselves; that is, these poor Israelites wanted to turn every one after his own ways, and to have at the same time the blessing of God, to please themselves and yet to be surrounded with the tokens of God's favour. (Compare Jer. 44) They had not, as so many of us have not, learned the truth, "Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom He receiveth."

But the Lord proceeds to give His own proofs, and puts the question through the prophet, "Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the Lord: yet I loved Jacob, and I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness." (vv. 2, 3.) It must be carefully observed that this is not an appeal to God's sovereignty in His choice of Jacob as in Rom. 9, where the apostle indeed cites this passage (after he has recalled the scripture which announced the divine purpose respecting Esau and Jacob) to show, not only that Israel was entirely indebted to grace for the difference God had put between themselves and Esau, but also that God's ways with the two branches of Isaac's descendants had been in accordance with His purposes. The evidence here given is drawn wholly, not from God's action towards Esau himself, but from God's judgments upon his posterity — "I laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons of the wilderness." And in other scriptures we find (see especially Obadiah) that these judgments were visited upon them because of their irreconcilable hatred of Israel, and their triumph over, and their vengeance upon, them in the day of their calamity. God had chosen Jacob — let not this truth be ignored, albeit Esau despised his birthright; but the scripture before us concerns the ways rather than the sovereignty of God.

Moreover the Lord takes occasion to proclaim His everlasting indignation against Edom (see Isa. 34:5-8; Isa. 63:1-4; Jeremiah 49:9-17, &c.), and that though Edom would seek, in the energy of their own strength, to build, God, being against them, would throw down, and manifestly make them a byword amongst their neighbours who should call them "The border of wickedness," and "The people against whom Jehovah hath indignation for ever." Thus the issue of God's dealings with Israel and Esau respectively would prove His love for His chosen people; but He says, "Your, eyes shall see, and ye shall say, The Lord will be magnified from the border of Israel." From the revelation thus made flow two most instructive lessons. First, that God is not to be judged by present circumstances. It is the result of His ways that vindicates His name. Faith always justifies God in His dealings with His people; but eventually all His ways will be seen, as in the case before us, to be the expression both of His love and His truth. The second lesson is, that God never allows the state of His people to interfere with the accomplishment of His counsels of grace. Thus at the very moment that He is about to expose the wretched spiritual condition of Israel, He declares their future blessing. Truly the knowledge of this should humble us, and at the same time give us a deeper sense of the sin of coldness, indifference, and backsliding in the presence of such unchanging grace and love. He can righteously act thus, because He has been (and all His ways with Israel had respect to this) so abundantly glorified in the death of His beloved Son, who died for that nation, and not for that nation only, but that also He should gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad. (John 11:51-52.)

The Lord having reminded His people of His relationship to them, and of His unalterable purposes of grace, now commences on that foundation to search them as to their practical condition. This principle is of all importance. The believer can never measure his true state before God unless he does it by the standard of the position in which he by grace has been set. It is a common error to deduce our place from our state; but nothing could more completely contradict the truth of God. If a saint, if a child of God, a member of Christ, a believer, does not cease to be this because he has backslidden, and become insensible to the claims which are thus established upon him, it is only, on the other hand, by the acceptance, without question, of every position in which he has been put, that he can either understand what grace is, or gauge the depth of his fall, if he has fallen. It is on this principle that Jehovah acts in this scripture, and hence He says: "A son honoureth his father, and a servant his master: if then I be a father, where is mine honour? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the Lord of hosts unto you, O priests, that despise my name. And ye say, Wherein have we despised thy name?" (v. 6.)

In this solemn manner does God arraign, not the people merely, but especially the priests. These He had chosen to stand before Him, to offer the sacrifices of His people, to instruct them in His word, and to have compassion on the ignorant and those that were out of the way; but so far from meeting their responsibilities they had sunk into complete moral degradation. The state of the priests, even as now the state of those who presumptuously take the place of such, as well as those who are really "pastors and teachers," is always more or less the state of the people. And what is the indictment that God brings against these sons of Aaron? He says, 'You profess that I am a Father to you' (and the adoption belonged to Israel), 'and that I am your Master: where then,' He asks, 'are the honour and the reverence due to me as such?' Nay, He tells them, "You despise my name."

The response to this charge brings out a characteristic of the whole book. "Wherein," say they, "have we despised thy name?" (See vv. 2, 6, 7; Mal. 3:7-8, 13.) Not only were they pursuing a course of forgetfulness of God, and dishonouring His name in all that they did, but, what was still worse, they were also ignorant of their actual condition. Hence in reply to the charges brought against them, they say, almost in surprise, "Wherein" have we done this or that? The counterpart of this may be seen in every age. Together with declension, spiritual perceptions grow ever more feeble, and keeping up, and it may be diligently and zealously, the outward forms of religion, souls are astonished if their attention is directed to their state. "An evil prophet," say they;" he takes a gloomy view of things; it is not well to be occupied with evil. Are we not the Lord's people? Ah! he should see us as the Lord sees us, and then he would look more constantly on to the time when the Church will be presented to Christ in all her spotless beauty and glory." But the work of a prophet is to deal with the state of the people, and to set their consciences in exercise in the presence of God, to cry indeed with Paul, "I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you a chaste virgin to Christ." (2 Cor. 11)

Let us then see how God proves to these careless priests that they were despising His name. He says:

"Ye offer polluted bread upon mine altar; and ye say, Wherein have we polluted thee? In that ye say, The table of the Lord is contemptible. And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor: will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the Lord of hosts. And now, I pray you, beseech God that He will be gracious unto us: this hath been by your means: will he regard your persons? saith the Lord of hosts. Who is there even among you that would shut the doors for nought? neither do ye kindle fire on mine altar for nought. I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand." (vv. 7-10.)

It should be noted that the altar and the table of the Lord, in this scripture, are one and the same thing. The altar is thus denominated because the sacrifices were termed, as also Christ whom these typified, God's bread. (See Lev. 21:6, 8, 17, 21, 22; Num. 28:2; John 6:33.) Hence the priests here are charged with offering polluted bread upon God's altar in proof that they despised Jehovah's name; for in so doing they plainly showed that they had lost all conception of the holiness of Him to whom they professed to sacrifice, and that the altar was in their eyes but a common thing, saying, by their act, that the Lord's table was contemptible. But the charge against them is even more distinct: they offered the blind, the lame, and the sick for sacrifice, thereby violating, and knowingly violating, one of the most rigid precepts of the Scriptures. In every case the animal offered upon the altar was to be "without blemish" (see Lev. 22:17-25), that it might be a more fitting type of Christ. But this was to give God of their best; and these men, as they surveyed their herds and flocks, lost to all sense of the divine claims, and the meaning of the sacrifices He required, were willing to give Him what was of no use to themselves — their valueless animals, but nothing more, thereby truly despising His name, polluting His altar, and making the Lord's table contemptible. They were thus treating Jehovah as they would not have dared to do with their governor. 'Offer what you offer me, saith the Lord, unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person?' They knew he would not.

Is there no voice to us in this solemn language? Are we never betrayed into offering to the Lord our useless things? When, for example, the opportunity is presented of giving to the Lord of our substance, to minister to His poor, or to have fellowship with His work in encouraging those who go forth, whether at home or abroad, taking nothing of the Gentiles, in what way do we act? Do we give of our best, of our first-fruits, or of our superfluities or useless things? Do we lay, so to speak, upon the altar as much as we can, or only as much as we may think necessary? Do we, in a word, acknowledge that the Lord's claims — we speak after the manner of men — are first and foremost? Do we begin first with Him or with ourselves? And do we never give more to man, when he asks of us, than we should have done if left to ourselves to act in secret before the Lord? Has not man indeed often more influence upon us in these things, because he is seen, than the Lord who is not seen? We might well search our hearts by the light of such words, that, while learning from them the state of this poor remnant, we may gain practical instruction for ourselves.

The prophet thereon proceeds (as it seems to us) in a tone of irony, "And now, I pray you, beseech God that He will be gracious unto us: this hath been by your means" (or, from your hand): "will He regard your persons? saith the Lord of hosts." "If I regard iniquity in my heart," says the Psalmist, "the Lord will not hear me." But these priests, spite of their condition — utterly indifferent and insensible as they were — did not hesitate to appear before God as if all were well. Pray, then, says the prophet, intercede that God may be gracious to us, and see if He will regard your persons. It is often a characteristic of a backslidden state that the outward forms of piety are continued, and sometimes with increased zeal. In proportion as life decays the attention is directed to rites and ceremonies. The soul thus deceives itself, and slides, as in the case before us, into a state of ignorance of its real condition. Losing all sense of its relationship with God, it places its dependence upon the exact performance of the required ceremonial. The Pharisees, for example, were most scrupulous in cleansing the outside of the cup and the platter, while they were perfectly indifferent concerning their inward cleansing.

Another charge is now formulated against these wicked priests. "Who is there even among you that would shut the doors for nought?" (evidently the doors of the temple) "neither do ye kindle fire on mine altar for nought." (v. 10.) So low had these sons of Aaron fallen that, forgetting the election of grace which had distinguished them from their brethren, and conferred upon them the privilege of being Jehovah's ministers, they now only regarded the work of their office as a means of profit. What a contrast to the spirit of the psalmist as he exclaims, "How amiable are thy tabernacles, O Lord of hosts! My soul longeth, yea, even fainteth, for the courts of the Lord: my heart and my flesh crieth out for the living God. … A day in thy courts is better than a thousand. I had rather be a doorkeeper in the house of my God, than to dwell in the tents of wickedness." (Psalm 84; see also Psalm 122, etc.) God Himself had provided for the maintenance of His priests; but they were not satisfied indeed to be in dependence upon Him; they desired to extort their remuneration from their fellow men. No greater revelation of the state of their hearts in their alienation from God could possibly be made. And is not this same spirit to-day the curse, as well as the evidence of the condition, of Christendom? Is it not notorious that so-called "sacred offices" are sought for and held for the sake of position and emolument? What "section" of the Church is free from this deadly taint? There are individual exceptions, thank God, but these are few and far between — the vast majority of preachers and "ministers" seeking for and obtaining specified salaries for the work which they engage to do. The cry therefore might be sounded out through the professing Church with equal propriety at the present time — "Who is there even among you that would shut the doors for nought? neither do ye kindle fire on mine altar for nought." And yet there is no lesson, more plainly written in the word of God than that He Himself undertakes for His servants, that, if it be His work they are engaged in, He will see to their recompense, for He will be debtor to none. Thus if the Lord borrowed the boat of Peter to speak from to the people on the shore, He will immediately reward Peter (not to enter upon the deeper significance of the incident) with a draught of fish. How much happier for us all (for none of us are exempt from the danger) to learn to be dependent on God, that we may be independent of men.

The climax of their spiritual condition having been indicated, Jehovah declares that He has no pleasure in them, and that He would not accept an offering at their hands. (Compare Isaiah 1 and Hebrews 10) This announcement becomes the occasion of the revelation of His purposes of grace towards the Gentiles. "For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same, my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts." (v. 11) These two things are ever conjoined in Scripture — the unbelief and apostacy of the Jew, and the bringing in of the Gentile. The apostle explains it when he says, "I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in." (Romans 11:25. Compare Isaiah 49, Acts 13:45-48, etc.)

In the remaining verses of the chapter (12-14) the Lord reaffirms His charges against His people, bringing out even more fully how completely they despised His service, esteeming it a "weariness;" and He then pronounces a curse upon "the deceiver, which hath in his flock a male, and voweth, and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing." (Compare with this the sin of Ananias and Sapphira, in Acts 5.) He affirms His word (so to speak) by the declaration, "For I am a great King, saith the Lord of hosts, and my name is dreadful among the heathen." Together with moral insensibility — the special characteristic brought out in this chapter — there is always of necessity the loss of all sense of the holiness of God, and of what is due to His name. But whenever and wherever this is the case, God will cause His name to be honoured and reverenced even by those who hitherto had not known Him. He will be glorified, and in this way convict His people of their sin, and turn that sin, blessed be His name, into the opportunity for the outflow of the streams of His grace towards those — the Gentiles — who had no claim upon Him but for judgment. The introduction of the word king in this connection is significant. Not only is it the assertion of the divine authority in the kingdom, but it also contains a warning of the approach of the time when the kingdom would be established in power and righteousness, and when, as a consequence, there would be a limit to Jehovah's long-suffering and forbearance towards those who despised His name.

---

1) It is interesting to note, especially in connection with chapter 3, that "Malachi" means the messenger of Jehovah. The prophet therefore, as was not unusual, had a typical character.