Malachi - 1:12



12 "But you profane it, in that you say, 'Yahweh's table is polluted, and its fruit, even its food, is contemptible.'

Verse In-Depth

Explanation and meaning of Malachi 1:12.

Differing Translations

Compare verses for better understanding.
But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, The table of the LORD is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible.
But ye profane it, in that ye say, The table of Jehovah is polluted, and the fruit thereof, even its food, is contemptible.
And you have profaned it in that you say: The table of the Lord is defiled: and that which is laid thereupon is contemptible with the fire that devoureth it.
But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, The table of the LORD is polluted; and the fruit of it, even his provision, is contemptible.
And ye are polluting it in your saying, 'The table of Jehovah, it is polluted, As to its fruit, despicable is its food.'
But you make it unholy by saying, The Lord's table has become unclean, and his food is of no value.
But ye profane it, In that ye say: 'The table of the LORD is polluted, And the fruit thereof, even the food thereof, is contemptible.'
And you have polluted it, in that you say, "The table of the Lord has been contaminated; and that which is placed upon it is contemptible, compared with the fire that devours it."
Et vos polluistis illud, quum dicitis, Mensa Iehovae polluta est; et proventus ejus (vel, fructus; alii vertunt, sermonem) contemptibilis cibus ejus.

*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.


Historical Commentaries

Scholarly Analysis and Interpretation.

This verse may be confined to the priests, or it may be extended to the whole people; for both views are appropriate. As to my own view, I doubt not but that the Prophet here reproves with additional severity the priests, and that at the same time he extends his reproof to the people in general. We saw in our yesterday's lecture how religion had been polluted by the priests, and how impiously they had profaned the worship of God: but this was the general sin of the whole people, as we shall presently see. Let us then know that the whole people, as well as the priests, are here reproved: but as a crime in the priests was more grievous, they being the occasion of sacrilege to others, the Prophet assails them in an especial manner, Ye, he says, have polluted my name He gives a reason, and at the same time enhances their guilt: for they might have complained, that God not only put them on a level with the Gentiles, but also rejected them, and substituted aliens in their place. He shows that God had a just cause for disinheriting them, and for adopting the Gentiles as his children, for they had polluted God's name. He at the same time amplifies their sin, when he says, "The Gentiles, by whom I have been hitherto despised, and to whom my name was not made known, will soon come to the faith; thus my name shall be great, it shall be reverently worshipped by all nations; but ye have polluted it." It was certainly very strange, that the Jews, peculiarly chosen and illuminated by the doctrine of the Law, so presumptuously polluted God's worship, as though they despised him, and that the Gentiles, being novices, rendered obedience to God as soon as they tasted of the truth of religion, so that his glory became through them illustrious. He afterwards shows how the name of Gog was polluted, Ye say, The table of Jehovah is polluted; that is, ye distinguish not between what is sacred and profane: for he repeats what we noticed yesterday, -- that the Jews thought it a frivolous matter, when the Prophets taught them that God was to be worshipped with all reverence. It is not however probable, that they openly uttered such a blasphemy as that the table of God was polluted; but it is easy to conclude from what is said, that God's table was profaned by them, for they made no account of it. The holiness of the table ought to have been so regarded by the Jews, as not to approach the sanctuary without true repentance and faith; they ought to have known that they had to do with God, and that his majesty ought to have deeply touched them. When therefore they came to the temple, and brought with them their uncleanness like swine, it was quite evident that they had no reverence for the temple, or the altar, or the table. According to this sense then are the words of the Prophet to be understood, -- not that the Jews openly mocked God, but that the holiness of the temple was with them of no account. With regard to the Table, we stated yesterday, that when God ordered sacrifices to be offered to him, it was the same as though he familiarly dwelt among the Jews, and became as it were their companion. It was the highest honor and an instance of God's ineffable goodness, that he thus condescended, so that the people might know that he was not to be sought afar off. And for this reason the less excusable was their impiety, as they did not consider that sacrifices were celebrated on earth, that their minds might be raised up above the heavens: for it is to this purpose that God descends to us, even to raise us above, as we have elsewhere stated. It was then an extremely base and shameful senselessness and stupidity in the Jews, that they did not consider that God's table was set among them, that they might by faith penetrate into heaven, and know it to be even before their eyes. As to the words, Its fruit is his contemptible food, we must observe, that some render, nyv, nib, word, and bring this passage from Isaiah, "I have created the fruit of the lips, peace, peace," (Isaiah 57:19.) The verb, nvv, nub, means to fructify; hence, nyv, nib, is fruit or produce. Were we to grant that it is metaphorically taken for word, yet I see no reason why we should depart from its simple and real meaning. For first there will be a relative without an antecedent, nyvv, nibu, his word; and then there will be a change of number; for they apply it to the priests, his word, that is, the word of them -- of whom? of the priests. It is common, I know, in Hebrew, to put a relative without an antecedent; but as I have said, nothing requires this here. The most suitable rendering then is, Its provision, that is, of the altar, is the contemptible food of God. [1] I take then the words to mean this, that a speech of this kind was often in the mouth of the people as well as of the priests, -- "Oh! the provision for the altar is any kind of meat; be not so anxious in your choice, so as to offer the best animals; for God is satisfied even with the lean and the maimed." And here again God reproves the impiety and contempt of the people; and at the same time he condemns their avarice, because they took the worst of their animals to offer in the temple, as though they lost everything they consecrated to God. Why he calls the sacrifices the meat or food of God, we now sufficiently understand. Only this ought to be observed, that the impiety of the people was evident, as they were so unconcerned in their duties; for God had not in vain instituted sacrifices and other rites. The contempt then of the signs openly showed not only the negligence of the people, but also their contempt of all religion. Were any one at this day to regard as nothing outward teaching and the sacraments, would he not prove himself to be an impious despiser of God? Yet religion, I allow, does not consist in these things; for though hypocrites pretend the most ardent zeal, they yet profane the name of God, whenever the truth sounds in their ears and the heart is not touched, and when they come to the Lord's table and are at the same time alienated from Christ. These things I allow; but as no true servant of God can despise these ordinances, which on account of our common infirmity are useful to us, and without which we cannot be as long as we sojourn in this world, whosoever derides our simplicity in frequenting God's house, or if silent abstains from doing so, and regards such a practice as nothing or as unimportant, he is thus, as I have said, proved guilty of impiety. This is the reason why the Prophet so sharply reproves the Jews, because they said that the provision for the altar was God's contemptible food. It follows --

Footnotes

1 - And what is offered thereon, even its food, is despicable.--Newcome. This is nearly the version of the Septuagint. And its fruit, even his food, is contemptible.--Henderson The table of Jehovah, polluted it is and his (or, its) fruit; contemptible is his (or, its) food.--Marckius The last comes nearest to the original, and is the most obvious construction. The verse may be thus rendered: But ye profane it by saying, "The table of Jehovah, Polluted is it and its fruit, Contemptible is its food." -- Ed.

And ye have profaned - o (are habitually profaning it), in that ye say It was the daily result of their daily lives and acts. "It is probable that the priests did not use such words, but that by their very deeds, they proclaimed this aloud: as in the, 'The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.' For in that he is seen to be a despiser, though he say it not in words, yet, by their very deeds and by the crookedness of their lives, they all but cry out, There is no God. For they who live as though God beheld not, and do all things recklessly and unholily, by their own deeds and works deny God. So they who are not earnest to preserve to the holy altar the reverence becoming to it, by the very things which they do, say,
The table of the Lord is despised - Not the "table of showbread," since it is so called in reference to the sacrifice offered thereon. Ezekiel had probably so called the altar, which he saw in his vision of the new temple. Ezekiel 44:16. It is what was before called "the altar;" an altar, in regard to the sacrifices offered to God; a "table," in regard to the food of the sacrifice therefrom received. Both names, "altar" Matthew 5:23; Hebrews 13:10. and "table" 1-Corinthians 10:21. being received in the New Testament, both were received in the early Church. For each represented one side of the great eucharistic action, as it is a Sacrifice and a sacrament. But the title "altar" was the earliest.
It may be here a different profaneness of the priests. They connived at the sin of the people in sacrificing the maimed animals which they brought, and yet, since they had their food from the sacrifices, and such animals are likely to have been neglected and ill-conditioned, they may very probably have complained of the poverty of their lot, and despised the whole service. For the words used, "its produce, the eating thereof is contemptible" belong to their portion, not to what was consumed by fire. With this agrees their cry.

Ye have profaned it - Ye have desecrated God's worship; is it any wonder that God should cast you off, and follow you with his judgments?

But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, (n) The table of the LORD [is] polluted; and the fruit thereof, [even] his meat, [is] contemptible.
(n) Both the priests and the people were infected with this error, that they did not regard what was offered: for they thought that God was as well content with the lean, as with the fat. But in the meantime they did not show the obedience to God which he required, and so committed impiety, and also showed their contempt of God, and covetousness.

But ye have profaned it,.... That is, the name of the Lord, which they are said to despise, Malachi 1:6 and pollute, Malachi 1:7 and is a reason why they and their offerings were rejected: and that they profaned the name of the Lord appears by this,
in that ye say, The table of the Lord is polluted: the same with "contemptible", Malachi 1:7 as Kimchi observes; See Gill on Malachi 1:7,
and the fruit thereof, even his meat is contemptible; the word for fruit (o) sometimes is used for speech, the fruit of the lips, Isaiah 57:19 and taken in this sense here, as it is by some, may be understood either of the word of God, which commanded such and such sacrifices to be offered up upon the altar, and was despised, so Abarbinel: or the word of the priests, who were continually saying that what was offered up on the altar was contemptible, even the food which they ate of; so Jarchi and Kimchi. "Fruit" and "meat" seem to signify one and the same thing, and design the fruit and meat of the altar; either that which belonged to the Lord, the fat and the blood, which were offered to him, and were reckoned contemptible; or that which fell to the share of the priests, which they thought mean and worthless. Cocceius interprets this of Christ the Branch of the Lord, and fruit of the earth, Isaiah 4:2 whose meat it was to do the will of him that sent him, and was despised and rejected by the Jews; and which was the reason of God's casting them off, and taking in the Gentiles.
(o) "et verbum ejus", Pagninus, Munster; "sermo ejus, vel eorum", Vatablus; so Ben Melech.

Renewal of the charge in Malachi 1:7.
fruit . . . meat--the offerings of the people. The "fruit" is the produce of the altar, on which the priests subsisted. They did not literally say, The Lord's table is contemptible; but their acts virtually said so. They did not act so as to lead the people to reverence, and to offer their best to the Lord on it. The people were poor, and put off God with the worst offerings. The priests let them do so, for fear of offending the people, and so losing all gains from them.

But ye - O priests! And the people by your examples. Ye say - By your deportment. Is polluted - Not a sacred thing. His meat - Either the meat which fell to the priest's share, or the portion which was laid upon the altar.

*More commentary available at chapter level.


Discussion on Malachi 1:12

User discussion of the verse.






*By clicking Submit, you agree to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use.