Bible Fiber is on Youtube or wherever you listen to your podcasts!
The last of the Minor Prophets, Malachi, is the final book in the Christian Old Testament canon and the last writing prophet.
The book’s superscription is sparse on biographical details. Other prophets often cited their hometown or the name of their father. The only information we have on Malachi is his name, and its validity is uncertain. The Hebrew word malachi can also translate as a title: “my messenger.” Perhaps the book intentionally leaves the prophet unnamed and is ascribing its authorship to an anonymous messenger of Yahweh. The Septuagint scribes understood the introduction as “his messenger” and translated the introduction accordingly: “the word of Yahweh to Israel by the hand of his messenger” (1:1). In the Masoretic tradition, the basis for our Protestant Bible translations of this passage, the pronouncement includes the proper name: “the word of Yahweh to Israel by the hand of Malachi” (1:1). It’s difficult to know which is correct, but for our study purposes, the Jewish tradition has retained Malachi as the name of the author over the centuries, and I see no compelling reason to change it. Additionally, including the author’s name in the introduction to a prophetic book is a common enough practice to assume that Malachi also conformed to this formula.
Dating
Unlike Haggai and Zechariah who gave precise dating, Malachi did not provide a date or even a historical figure—such as the reign of an imperial king—to timestamp the oracle. However, from internal features in the text, scholars confidently date Malachi to the postexilic period. The prophet referred to the temple system in a manner that suggests that the rebuilt temple had been operative for years (1:6-14; 3:18). Therefore, Malachi likely wrote after the completion of the Second Temple in 516 BCE.
The details of Malachi’s accusations against the community parallel the complaints found in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. Like these prophets, Malachi condemned intermarriage with pagans (2:10-16). He also accused the priesthood of failing to perform their duties (1:6-2:9), and it irritated him that the people were neglecting their temple tithes (3:6-12). Most biblical historians agree Malachi had to be a near contemporary to Ezra and Nehemiah because of the overlap in the specific community problems they faced. However, Malachi never mentions Ezra or Nehemiah. To narrow the range of his dating, it seems likely he came onto the scene right before these two postexilic leaders. Perhaps Malachi’s prophecies had laid the groundwork for their reforms.
Ezra left Babylon and returned to Jerusalem in 458 BCE. Nehemiah joined him in 445 BCE. The two overlapped for about 12 years. By this calculation, Malachi likely delivered his oracle sometime between 516 BCE and 458 BCE—after the temple was complete, but before Ezra’s ministry to the returnees.
One other clue to Malachi’s dating is his reference to a governor in Jerusalem (1:8). He used the Assyrian term for governor, pechâh, which was only used during the postexilic period. The governors given this title were always Persian imperial appointees. Ezra referred to Sheshbazzar, the first leader of the postexilic community, as the governor of Judah who was appointed by Cyrus (Ezra 5:14). Haggai used the Assyrian title pechâh for Zerubbabel (Hag. 1:1, 2:2). Nehemiah also served as pechâh for 12 years in Judah (Neh. 5:14). Scholars interpret Malachi’s use of the Assyrian term as additional evidence of his postexilic date.
Literary style
On a literary note, Malachi wrote less creatively, but more directly, than prophets like Zechariah. He toned down the figurative language and used more covenant terminology. Malachi’s disputations were incredibly direct, prioritizing the Mosaic law, priesthood, and the temple. Malachi delivered God’s message through the expert use of six hypothetical dialogues. In these tightly patterned disputations, God asked a rhetorical question, the people’s response exposed their apathy or cynicism, and then God made an assertion, through Malachi, to hammer home his point. Malachi’s chapter divisions are arbitrary and therefore are not the best guide for ordering our study of the book. Instead, we will divide the book along the lines of the six disputations, which most translations mark off with subtitles.
In the superscription, Malachi addressed Israel, rather than Judah. When postexilic prophets referred to Israel, they were not referencing the former Northern Kingdom. Nothing had remained of that political entity for centuries, by the time they ministered. After Jacob had wrestled with the angel, God gave him the alternative name Israel, which meant “wrestles with God” (Gen. 32:28). After the struggles of exile, all the descendants of Jacob had earned the designation, Israel. The former 12 tribes had been whittled down to one united people of God.
First Disputation
Malachi’s first disputation focuses on the Edomites (Malachi 1:1-5). As I covered in the Obadiah essay, Jacob and Esau were the quintessential examples of fraternal enmity. Esau was the Old Testament Super Villain, complete with a complicated backstory and daddy issues. Esau’s descendants, the people of Edom, maintained a cold hostility with Israel for hundreds of years, giving them significant attention in the prophetic books.
Malachi’s first disputation begins with God declaring his love for Israel. The people retorted, “how have you loved us?” (1:2). The dialogue between God and Israel was not an actual conversation, but a series of hypothetical dialogues, through which Malachi exposed the defiance of the people. Often when the prophets were trying to jog the nation’s collective memory, they invoked the Exodus or God’s provision during the wilderness wanderings. Malachi went further back in time to the patriarchal age, emphasizing God’s initial election of Jacob over Esau.
He asked, “‘Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?’ (1:2). This is another rhetorical question because Malachi’s audience was well-versed in their origin story as the descendants of Jacob. As part of the story, custom entitled Esau to the birthright because he was the firstborn twin. God’s choice had trumped the cultural norms.
Both Jacob/Israel and Esau/Edom were flawed characters in the Bible. Yahweh’s election of Jacob was completely of divine initiative and was not based on Jacob’s righteousness, as the many biblical stories of Jacob’s compulsive deceit demonstrate. Paul, in Romans, alluded to Malachi when he wrote about the theology of the divine will:
As it is written, ‘I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau.’ What then are we to say? Is there injustice on God’s part? Not! For he says to Moses, ‘I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion’ (Rom. 9:13-14).
Esau versus Jacob
Translation questions surround the divine announcement, “I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau” (1:2). Is the statement as harsh as it sounds? Biblical interpreters make an interesting argument that when Bible translators use the word “hate,” sometimes it does not refer to the intense human emotion with which we are familiar. Rather, the Hebrew idiom for “hate” is better recognized as “not prefer” or “love less.”
Jacob’s preference for Rachel over Leah in Genesis is the prime illustration of the discrepancy. The NIV reflects the understanding that the Hebrew word does not mean “hate,” but means “love less.” The NIV reads, “When the Lord saw that Leah was not loved, he enabled her to conceive” (Gen. 29:31). The ESV, KJV, and ASV still translate the word “hate.” They read along these lines: “When the Lord saw that Leah was hated, he opened her womb.” Leah, the wife of most of Jacob’s children, wasn’t hated in his life story; he merely loved her less than Rachel.
God may be saying the same type of thing in the Malachi disputation. He did not hate Esau, but he did not love Esau like he loved Jacob. In fact, God instructed the Israelites, back in Deuteronomy, not to detest Edom on account of their kinship: “You shall not abhor any of the Edomites, for they are your kin” (Deut. 23:7). Why would God forbid the Israelites from hating the Edomites if he did not hate them himself?
Misunderstanding of the Hebrew idiom may have influenced the Aramaic in the New Testament. Jesus told his disciples to “hate” their parents, spouses, children, and siblings (Luke 14:26), but that command countered everything else in the teachings of Jesus. It makes much more sense if Jesus was using the common Hebrew idiom for “love less” or “not prefer.” He was telling his disciples to love him even more than their own families.
God was reassuring the people of their status by contrasting Israel’s destiny with Edom’s. Edom was Israel’s earliest and longest running rivalry. Despite their kinship, they were never easy neighbors. The prophets speak of the Edomites as a stand-in for all wicked nations. No other people were closer to Israel’s lineage and land than Edom. Yet, God saw the two as distinct.
God promised Judah that he would destroy Edom. Preexilic prophets like Amos, Ezekiel, Obadiah, Isaiah, and Jeremiah had all predicted Edom’s devastation (Amos 9:3; Ezek. 25:12-14; Obad. 10; Isa. 34; Jer. 49:7-22). In every case, the end of Edom was a harbinger of Israel’s future restoration.
God said, “I have turned his hill country into a wasteland and left his inheritance to the desert jackals” (1:3). The Bible frequently emphasized the extent of desolation in cursed places by depicting wild animals roaming the land instead of people (Isa. 34). Malachi was the first prophet to indicate that the downfall of Edom had begun. Malachi’s language structure suggested Edom’s fall would be complete within the lifetime of his audience. The downturn had started, even if it was not yet finished.
The Edomites did not leave behind their recorded national history. The Bible and archaeology are the main sources of knowledge about Edom. Before the Babylonian invasion, Edom and Israel had a tense relationship. The pottery record shows that around the end of the First Temple period, Edom had pushed into Negev territory and had even reached into southern Judah. Archaeologists discovered a site called Horvat Qitmat which is an open-air Edomite shrine right in the Judean Negev. Clearly, despite their enmity, they had a long period of influence on one another culturally and tolerated their geographic nearness.
Although the Babylonian army destroyed Jerusalem in 586 BCE, they spared Edom. In fact, the Bible paints a picture of Edomites celebrating Judah’s fall, plundering their homes, moving into evacuated lands, and capturing Judean refugees (Obad. 10-16; Lam. 4:2). By the rivers of Babylon, the psalmist recorded the exiles’ memories of how the Edomites had taken advantage of their misfortune: “Remember, Lord, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell. ‘Tear it down,’ they cried, ‘tear it down to its foundations!’ (Ps. 137:7).
According to Josephus, Nebuchadnezzar’s armies raided the neighboring nations, Ammon and Moab, several years after Jerusalem, in 582 BCE. Some historians assume Edom was included in the raids, even if not directly named by Josephus. Malachi was perhaps portraying an attack on the Edomites when they cried out, “we are shattered but we will rebuild the ruins” (1:4). Clearly, at some point the Edomites had fallen on hard times, like all the surrounding peoples who fell victim to Babylon. Like Israel, it was their intent to rebuild what Babylon had destroyed.
Yet, when Edom tried to rebuild their nation, Yahweh stopped their efforts. Malachi’s oracle said he would frustrate the Edomites’ every attempt: “the Lord of hosts says: They may build, but I will tear down, until they are called the wicked country, the people with whom the Lord is angry forever” (1:5). Indeed, by the fourth century BCE, a seminomadic group began moving into Edom and pushing out the native Edomites. There is no evidence that they conquered Edom militarily, but somehow a new people gained control of the former Edomite regions. By 312 BCE, the Nabateans, an Arabian tribe, completely overran the Edomites’ former territory. Adept builders and successful traders, the Nabateans transformed the former Edomite stronghold Sela into Petra. The mixed population that stemmed from Edomite and Nabatean relationships became known as the Idumeans.
By the time Malachi ministered to the returnees of Judah, the early enthusiasm of the community had given way to disillusionment. Malachi was a confrontational prophet, but he tried to show the people that despite their exile and suffering, their survival was a miracle of God. Unlike Edom, who would lose her land forever, Jerusalem was on a positive trajectory. The people would complete the construction of their temple and reinstate the sacrificial system. God wanted his people to open their eyes to the reality of his works on their behalf, even if it seemed delayed. Malachi reported, “Your own eyes shall see this, and you shall say, ‘Great is the Lord beyond the borders of Israel!’” (1:5).
By comparing the separate fortunes of Israel and Edom, Yahweh was asking his people to acknowledge his provision. He reminded them of their divine election, going back to the days of Jacob and Esau. Yahweh assured Israel of his love by speaking the language of revenge on their enemies, a highly effective vocabulary to ancient Near Eastern ears. Over the course of the next five disputations, God had a question for the people that he needed them to answer: Do they love him in return?