1절 카드 ↗
They who explain משא , mesha , burden, as signifying prophecy, without exception, are mistaken, as I have elsewhere reminded you; for prophecy is not everywhere called a burden; and whenever this word is expressed, there is ever to be understood some judgment of God; and it appears evident from Jeremiah 23:38 , that this word was regarded as ominous, so that the ungodly, when they wished to brand the Prophets with some mark of reproach, used this as a common proverb, “It is a burden,” intimating thereby that nothing else was brought by the Prophets but threatenings and terrors, in order that they might have some excuse for closing their ears, and for evading all prophecies by giving them an unhappy and ominous name. As we proceed it will become evident that the doctrine of Malachi is not without reason called a Burden; for as I have stated in part, and as it will be more fully seen hereafter, it was necessary that the people should be summoned before God’s tribunal, inasmuch as many sins had again begun to prevail among them, and such as could not be endured: and for this reason he says that God’s judgment was at hand. But under the name of Israel he refers only to those who had returned to their own country, whether they were of the tribe of Judah and Benjamin, or of the tribe of Levi. It is nevertheless probable that there were also some mixed with them from the other tribes: but the Jews and their neighbors, the half tribe of Benjamin, had almost alone returned to their country, with the exception of the Levites, who had been their guides in their journey, and encouraged the rest of the people. They were yet called Israel indiscriminately, since among them only pure religion continued: but they who remained dispersed among foreign and heathen nations, had as it were lost their name, though they had not wholly departed from the pure worship of God and true religion. Hence, by way of excellency, they were called Israel, who had again assembled in the holy land, that they might there enjoy the inheritance promised them from above. The word hand , as we have observed elsewhere, means ministration. The meaning then is, that this doctrine proceeded from God, but that a minister, even Malachi, was employed as an instrument; so that he brought nothing as his own, but only related faithfully what had been committed to him by God from whom it came. It then follows — return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-2" class="com-number"
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-001
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
"짐" (משא)을 예외 없이 예언을 의미한다고 설명하는 자들은 내가 다른 곳에서 지적한 것처럼 잘못 생각하는 것이다. 예언이 항상 짐이라고 불리는 것이 아니기 때문이다. 이 단어가 나타날 때마다 항상 어떤 하나님의 심판이 암시되어 있다. 예레미야 23:38에서 이 단어가 불길한 것으로 여겨졌음이 분명히 나타난다. 그래서 불경건한 자들이 선지자들에게 비난의 표를 붙이려 할 때, "그것은 짐이다"라는 속담을 사용했다. 이로써 그들은 선지자들이 오직 위협과 공포만을 가져온다고 암시하여, 귀를 막고 불행하고 불길한 이름으로 모든 예언을 피할 핑계를 얻으려 했다.
이 책의 내용을 살펴보면 말라기의 교훈이 이유 없이 "짐"이라 불린 것이 아님이 분명해진다. 내가 이미 부분적으로 언급했고 앞으로 더 충분히 보이게 될 것처럼, 백성이 하나님의 법정 앞에 소환되어야 했다. 많은 죄들이 다시 그들 사이에 만연해지기 시작했고, 그것들은 묵과할 수 없는 것들이었기 때문이다. 이런 이유로 그는 하나님의 심판이 임박했다고 선포한다.
"이스라엘"이라는 이름 아래 선지자는 오직 자국으로 돌아온 자들만을 가리킨다. 그들이 유다와 베냐민 지파 출신이든, 레위 지파 출신이든 모두 포함된다. 그럼에도 다른 지파들 중에도 일부가 그들과 섞여 있었을 것이다. 그러나 유대인들과 그들의 이웃인 베냐민 반쪽 지파가, 레위인들을 제외하고는, 거의 홀로 자국으로 돌아왔다. 레위인들은 그 여정에서 백성의 안내자가 되었고 나머지 사람들을 격려했다. 그들이 구별 없이 이스라엘이라 불린 것은, 오직 그들 중에만 순수한 종교가 이어졌기 때문이다. 반면 이방 나라들에 흩어져 남아 있던 자들은 순수한 하나님 예배와 참된 종교에서 완전히 떠나지는 않았을지라도, 이름을 잃어버린 것과 같았다. 따라서 탁월한 의미에서, 거룩한 땅에 다시 모여 위로부터 약속된 기업을 누리던 자들이 이스라엘이라 불렸다.
"손"(手)이라는 말은 우리가 다른 곳에서도 언급했듯이 사역(ministry)을 의미한다. 그러므로 이 교훈은 하나님에게서 나왔으나 도구로서 종 곧 말라기가 사용되었다는 것이다. 그가 자신의 것을 전하지 않고, 하나님께서 자신에게 맡기신 것을 신실하게 전달했을 뿐이다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-1-1(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
2절 카드 ↗
I am constrained by the context to read all these verses; for the sense cannot be otherwise completed. God expostulates here with a perverse and an ungrateful people, because they doubly deprived him of his right; for he was neither loved nor feared, though he had a just claim to the name and honor of a master as well as that of a father. As then the Jews paid him no reverence, he complains that he was defrauded of his right as a father; and as they entertained no fear for him, he condemns them for not acknowledging, him as their Lord and Master, by submitting to his authority. But before he comes to this, he shows that he was both their Lord and Father; and he declares that he was especially their Father, because he loved them. We now then understand the Prophet’s intention; for God designed to show here how debased the Jews were, as they acknowledged him neither as their Father nor as their Lord; they neither reverenced him as their Lord, nor regarded him as their Father. But he brings forward, as I have already said, his benefits, by which he proves that he deserved the honor due to a father and to a master. Hence he says, I loved you . God might indeed have made an appeal to the Jews on another ground; for had he not manifested his love to them, they were yet bound to submit to his authority. He does not indeed speak here of God’s love generally, such as he shows to the whole human race; but he condemns the Jews, inasmuch as having been freely adopted by God as his holy and peculiar people, they yet forgot this honor, and despised the Giver, and regarded what he taught them as nothing. When therefore God says that he loved the Jews, we see that his object was to convict them of ingratitude for having despised the singular favor bestowed on them alone, rather than to press that authority which he possesses over all mankind in common. God then might have thus addressed them, “I have created you, and have been to you a kind Father; by my favor does the sun shine on you daily, and the earth produces its fruit; in a word, I hold you bound to me by innumerable benefits.” God might have thus spoken to them; but as I have said, his object was to bring forward the gratuitous adoption with which he had favored the seed of Abraham; for it was a less endurable impiety, that they had despised so incomparable a favor; inasmuch as God had preferred them to all other nations, not on the ground of merit or of any worthiness, but because it had so pleased him. This then is the reason why the Prophet begins by saying, that the Jews had been loved by God: for they had made the worst return for this gratuitous favor, when they despised his doctrine. This is the first thing. There is further no doubt but that he indirectly condemns their ingratitude when he says, In what hast thou loved us? The words indeed may be thus explained — “If ye say, or if ye ask, In what have I loved you? Even in this — I preferred your father Jacob to Esau, when yet they were twin brothers.” But we shall see in other places that the Jews by evasions malignantly obscured God’s favor, and that this wickedness is in similar words condemned. Hence the Prophet, seeing that he had to do with debased men, who would not easily yield to God nor acknowledge his kindness by a free and ingenuous confession, introduces them here as speaking thus clamorously, “He! when hast thou loved us! in what! the tokens of thy love do not appear.” He answers in God’s name, Esau was Jacob’s brother; and yet I loved Jacob, and Esau I hated . ” return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-3" class="com-number"
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-002
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
나는 문맥상 이 절들을 전체적으로 읽을 수밖에 없다. 그렇지 않으면 의미가 완성되지 않기 때문이다. 하나님이 여기서 패역하고 배은망덕한 백성과 논쟁하시는 이유는, 그들이 그분의 권리를 두 가지 방식으로 박탈했기 때문이다. 하나님은 아버지의 이름과 영예뿐 아니라 주인의 이름과 영예를 받으실 정당한 주장이 있었으나, 유대인들은 그분을 사랑하지도 두려워하지도 않았다. 그분은 그들에게 아버지로서 공경받지 못했고, 주님이자 주인으로 인정받지도 못했다.
그러나 하나님은 이것에 이르기 전에, 자신이 그들의 주님이자 아버지이심을 보이신다. 특히 그분이 그들의 아버지가 되시는 것은 그들을 사랑하시기 때문임을 선포하신다. 선지자의 의도가 이제 분명하다 — 하나님은 유대인들이 그분을 아버지로도, 주님으로도 인정하지 않는 것이 얼마나 비열한가를 보이려 하셨다. 그들은 아버지로서 그분을 공경하지도, 아버지로서 그분을 예우하지도 않았다.
그러나 그분은 이미 말한 것처럼 자신의 유익들을 내세우신다. 그것으로 그분은 자신이 아버지와 주인으로서 영예를 받을 자격이 있음을 증명하신다. 그러므로 그분은 말씀하신다. "내가 너희를 사랑하였노라." 하나님은 다른 근거로 유대인들에게 호소하실 수도 있었다. 그분이 그들에게 사랑을 나타내지 않으셨더라도, 그들은 여전히 그분의 권위에 복종할 의무가 있었기 때문이다. 그분은 여기서 전 인류에게 나타내시는 것과 같은 하나님의 일반적인 사랑에 대해 말씀하시지 않는다. 오히려 유대인들이 하나님의 거룩하고 특별한 백성으로 자유롭게 입양받았음에도 이 영예를 망각하고 주신 분을 멸시하며 그분이 가르치신 것을 무로 돌렸음을 책망하시는 것이다.
하나님이 유대인들을 사랑하셨다고 말씀하실 때, 그 목적은 그분이 그들에게만 베풀어 주신 비범한 은혜를 경멸함으로써 보인 배은망덕을 정죄하기 위한 것임을 우리는 알 수 있다. 하나님이 모든 민족보다 그들을 우선시하신 것은 공로나 어떤 가치 때문이 아니라, 그분이 기뻐하셨기 때문이다. 선지자가 처음에 유대인들이 하나님의 사랑을 받았다고 말하는 것은 이런 이유에서이다. 그들이 이 값없는 은혜에 대해 그분의 교훈을 경멸함으로써 최악의 보답을 했기 때문이다.
"어떻게 우리를 사랑하셨습니까?"라는 말은 유대인들이 하나님의 호의를 악의적으로 애매하게 만들며 회피했음을 다른 곳에서도 비슷한 표현으로 책망하고 있음을 감안할 때, 선지자가 그들의 뻔뻔한 반박을 인용하는 것으로 봐야 한다. 그분은 하나님의 이름으로 답하신다. "에서는 야곱의 형제가 아니더냐? 그러나 내가 야곱을 사랑하였고 에서는 미워하였노라."
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-2-2(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
3절 카드 ↗
We now see what I have just referred to, — that the Jews are reminded of God’s gratuitous covenant, that they might cease to excuse their wickedness in having misused this singular favor. He does not then upbraid them here, because they had been as other men created by God, because God caused his sun to shine on them, because they were supplied with food from the earth; but he says, that they had been preferred to other people, not on account of their own merit, but because it had pleased God to choose their father Jacob. He might have here adduced Abraham as an example; but as Jacob and Esau proceeded from Abraham, with whom God had made the covenant, his favor was the more remarkable, inasmuch as though Abraham had been alone chosen by God, and other nations were passed by, yet from the very family which the Lord had adopted, one had been chosen while the other was rejected. When a comparison is made between Esau and Jacob, we must bear in mind that they were brothers; but there are other circumstances to be noticed, which though not expressed here by the Prophet, are yet well known: for all the Jews knew that Esau was the first-born; and that hence Jacob had obtained the right of primogeniture contrary to the order of nature. As then this was commonly known, the Prophet was content to use only this one sentence, Esau was Jacob’s brother But he says that Jacob was chosen by God, and that his brother, the first-born, was rejected. If the reason be asked, it is not to be found in their descent, for they were twin brothers; and they had not come forth from the womb when the Lord by an oracle testified that Jacob would be the greater. We hence see that the origin of all the excellency which belonged to the posterity of Abraham, is here ascribed to the gratuitous love of God, according to what Moses often said, “Not because ye excelled other nations, or were more in number, has God honored you with so many benefits; but because he loved your fathers.” The Jews then had always been reminded, that they were not to seek for the cause of their adoption but in the gratuitous favor of God; he had been pleased to choose them — this was the source of their salvation. We now understand the Prophet’s design when he says, that Esau was Jacob’s brother , (202) and yet was not loved by God. We must at the same time bear in mind what I have already said — that this singular favor of God towards the children of Jacob is referred to, in order to make them ashamed of their ingratitude, inasmuch as God had set his love on objects so unworthy. For had they been deserving, they might have boasted that a reward was rendered to them; but as the Lord had gratuitously and of his own good pleasure conferred this benefit on them, their impiety was the less excusable. This baseness then is what our Prophet now reprobates. Then follows a proof of hatred as to Esau, the Lord made his mountain a desolation, and his inheritance a desert where serpents dwelt . Esau, we know, when driven away by his own shame, or by his father’s displeasure, came to Mount Seir; and the whole region where his posterity dwelt was rough and enclosed by many mountains. But were any to object and say, that this was no remarkable token of hatred, as it might on the other hand be said, that the love of God towards Jacob was not much shown, because he dwelt in the land of Canaan, since the Chaldeans inhabited a country more pleasant and more fruitful, and the Egyptians also were very wealthy; to this the answer is — that the land of Canaan was a symbol of God’s love, not only on account of its fruitfulness, but because the Lord had consecrated it to himself and to his chosen people. So Jerusalem was not superior to other cities of the land, either to Samaria or Bethlehem, or other towns, on account of its situation, for it stood, as it is well known, in a hilly country, and it had only the spring of Siloam, fiom which flowed a small stream; and the view was not so beautiful, nor its fertility great; at the same time it excelled in other things. for God had chosen it as his sanctuary; and the same must be said of the whole land. As then the land of Canaan was, as it were, a pledge of an eternal inheritance to the children of Abraham, the scripture on this account greatly extols it, and speaks of it in magnificent terms. If Mount Seir was very wealthy and replenished with everything delightful, it must have been still a sad exile to the Idumeans, because it was a token of their reprobation; for Esau, when he left his father’s house, went there; and he became as it were an alien, having deprived himself of the celestial inheritance, as he had sold his birthright to his brother Jacob. This is the reason why God declares here that Esau was dismissed as it were to the mountains, and deprived of the Holy Land which God had destined to his chosen people. But the Prophet also adds another thing, — that God’s hatred as manifested when the posterity of Esau became extinct. For though the Assyrians and Chaldeans had no less cruelly raged against the Jews than against the Edomites, yet the issue was very different; for after seventy years the Jews returned to their own country, as Jeremiah had promised: yet Idumea was not to be restored, but the tokens of God’s dreadful wrath had ever appeared there in its sad desolations. Since then there had been no restoration as to Idumea, the Prophet shows that by this fact the love of God towards Jacob and his hatred towards Esau had been proved; for it had not been through the contrivance of men that the Jews had liberty given them, and that they were allowed to build the temple; but because God had chosen them in the person of Jacob, and designed them to be a peculiar and holy people to himself. But as to the Edomites, it became then only more evident that they had been rejected in the person of Esau, since being once laid waste they saw that they were doomed to perpetual destruction. This is then the import of the Pro
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-002
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
이미 언급한 것이 여기서 확인된다 — 유대인들은 하나님의 값없는 언약을 상기시킴으로써 이 비범한 은혜를 남용한 자신들의 악함을 더 이상 변명하지 못하게 된다. 선지자는 그들이 다른 모든 사람들과 같이 하나님께 창조되었다거나, 하나님이 그들 위에 태양을 비추게 하셨다거나, 그들이 땅의 양식으로 공급받는다는 이유가 아니라, 그들의 아버지 야곱이 선택받았기 때문에, 그들의 공로가 아닌 하나님의 뜻으로, 그들이 다른 민족들보다 선호되었음을 책망한다.
선지자는 여기서 아브라함을 예로 들 수도 있었다. 그러나 야곱과 에서가 언약을 맺으신 아브라함으로부터 나왔기 때문에, 비록 아브라함만이 하나님께 선택받고 다른 민족들은 제쳐졌지만, 주께서 입양하신 바로 그 가문에서 한 사람이 선택되고 다른 사람은 거부되었다는 점에서 하나님의 은혜가 더욱 두드러진다.
에서와 야곱을 비교할 때, 그들이 형제였음을 염두에 두어야 한다. 그러나 여기서 선지자가 명시적으로 말하지 않지만, 유대인들이 잘 알고 있는 다른 상황도 주목해야 한다. 에서가 장자였으며, 야곱이 자연의 순서를 거슬러 장자권을 얻었다는 사실이다. 이것이 이미 잘 알려진 것이었으므로 선지자는 한 문장만으로 충분히 표현했다. "에서는 야곱의 형제였다." 그러나 야곱은 하나님께 선택받고 장자인 형제는 거부당했다. 이유를 묻는다면, 그들의 혈통에서 찾을 수 없다. 쌍둥이 형제였기 때문이다. 그들이 태에서 나오기 전에 주께서 이미 야곱이 더 크게 될 것임을 신탁으로 말씀하셨다.
그러므로 아브라함의 후손에게 속한 모든 탁월함의 기원이 하나님의 값없는 사랑에 있음이 여기서 확인된다. 모세가 자주 말했던 것처럼 "다른 민족들보다 뛰어났기 때문이 아니고, 수가 더 많기 때문도 아니다. 하나님이 너희를 이렇게 많은 복으로 영화롭게 하신 것은 오직 너희 조상들을 사랑하셨기 때문이다." 유대인들은 항상 자신들의 입양의 원인을 오직 하나님의 값없는 은혜에서 찾아야 함을 상기받아 왔다. 그분이 그들을 선택하시기를 기뻐하셨으니, 이것이 그들의 구원의 원천이다.
에서의 미움의 증거가 이어진다. 주께서 그의 산을 황무지로 만드시고 그의 기업을 뱀이 사는 사막으로 만드셨다는 것이다. 에서는 자신의 수치심으로, 혹은 아버지의 불만으로 인해 세일 산으로 쫓겨났음을 우리는 안다. 그리고 그의 후손들이 살았던 온 지역은 험하고 많은 산으로 둘러싸인 곳이었다.
그러나 혹자가 이것이 미움의 두드러진 표가 아니라고 반론할 수 있다. 마찬가지로 가나안 땅이 더 좋다고 말하기도 어렵다. 갈대아인들은 더 즐겁고 비옥한 나라에 살았고, 이집트인들도 매우 부유했기 때문이다. 이에 대한 답은 이러하다 — 가나안 땅은 그 비옥함 때문만이 아니라, 주께서 그 땅을 자신과 자신의 선택된 백성을 위해 거룩하게 하셨기 때문에 하나님 사랑의 상징이었다는 것이다. 예루살렘도 위치상으로 보면 사마리아나 베들레헴이나 다른 도시들보다 특별히 우월하지 않았다. 잘 알려진 것처럼 언덕 위에 있었고, 작은 시냇물이 흐르는 실로암 샘만 있었으며, 경치가 아름답지도 않았고 비옥하지도 않았다. 그럼에도 다른 점에서 탁월했다. 하나님이 그곳을 자신의 성소로 선택하셨기 때문이다. 가나안 온 땅도 마찬가지이다.
가나안 땅이 아브라함 자녀들에게 영원한 기업의 보증이었으므로, 성경은 그것을 크게 칭송하고 장엄하게 묘사한다. 세일 산이 아무리 부유하고 즐거운 것들로 가득했더라도, 그것이 에돔 사람들에게는 여전히 슬픈 유배지였다. 그들의 거부의 표였기 때문이다. 에서가 아버지의 집을 떠나 거기로 갔으므로, 그는 마치 이방인이 된 것 같았다. 자신의 장자권을 형제 야곱에게 팔았으므로 하늘의 기업을 스스로 박탈한 것이다. 이것이 선지자가 에서가 말하자면 산들로 떠나보내지고 하나님이 자신의 선택된 백성을 위해 정하신 거룩한 땅을 박탈당했다고 선포하는 이유이다.
선지자는 또한 에서의 후손이 끊어진 것으로 하나님의 미움이 나타났다고 덧붙인다. 앗수르인들과 갈대아인들이 유대인들에게 에돔 사람들에게 못지않게 잔인하게 행동했지만, 결말은 매우 달랐다. 유대인들은 예레미야가 약속한 대로 칠십 년 후에 자국으로 돌아왔으나, 에돔은 회복되지 않았고 그곳에는 하나님의 무서운 진노의 표가 슬픈 황폐함으로 항상 나타났다. 에돔에 대해서는 회복이 없었으므로, 선지자는 이 사실로써 야곱에 대한 하나님의 사랑과 에서에 대한 미움이 증명되었다고 보인다. 유대인들이 성전을 건축할 자유를 얻은 것이 사람들의 계략에 의한 것이 아니라, 하나님이 야곱 안에서 그들을 선택하시고 자신의 특별하고 거룩한 백성이 되도록 정하셨기 때문이다. 에돔 사람들에게 관해서는, 그들이 에서 안에서 거부된 것이 분명해졌다. 왜냐하면 한 번 황폐하게 된 후 영원한 멸망에 처해진 것을 보았기 때문이다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-3-3(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
4절 카드 ↗
And to the same purpose he adds, If Edom shall say, We have been diminished, but we shall return and build houses; but if they build, I will pull down, saith God . He confirms what I have stated, that the posterity of Edom had no hope of restoration, for however they might gather courage and diligently labor in rebuilding their cities, they were not yet to succeed, for God would pull down all their buildings. This difference then was like a living representation, by which the Jews might see the love of God towards Jacob, and his hatred towards Esau. For since both people were overthrown by the same enemy, how was it that liberty was given to the Jews and no permission was given to the Idumeans to return to their own country? There was, as it has been said, a greater ill-will to the Jews, and yet the Chaldeans dealt with them more kindly. It then follows, that all this was owing to the wonderful purpose of God, and that hence it also appeared, that the adoption, which seemed to have been abolished when the Jews were driven into exile, was not in vain. Thus then saith Jehovah of hosts, They shall build , that is, though they may build, I will overthrow; and it shall be said to them, Border of ungodliness, and a people with whom Jehovah is angry for ever . By the border of ungodliness he means an accursed border; as though he had said, “It will openly appear that you are reprobate, so that the whole world can form a judgment by the event itself.” By adding, A people with whom Jehovah is angry or displeased, he again confirms what I have said of love and hatred. God might indeed have been equally angry with the Jews as with the Edomites, but when God became pacified towards the Jews, while he continued inexorable to the posterity of Esau, the difference between the two people was hence quite manifest. Noticed also must be the words, עד - עולם , od-oulam , for ever: for God seemed for a time to have rejected the Jews, and the Prophets adopt the same word זעם , som , angry, when they deplore the condition of the people, who found in various ways that God was angry with them. But the wrath of God towards the Jews was only for a time, for he did not wholly forget his covenant; but he became angry with the Edomites for ever, because their father had been rejected: and we know that this difference between the elect and the reprobate is ever pointed out, that when God visits sins in common, he ever moderates his wrath towards his elect, and sets limits to his severity, according to what he says, “If his posterity keep not my covenant, but profane my law, I will chastise them with the rod of man; but my mercy will I not take away from him.” ( Psalms 89:31 2 Samuel 7:14 .) But with regard to the reprobate, God’s vengeance ever pursues them, is ever suspended over their heads, and ever fixed as it were in their bones and marrow. For this reason it is that our Prophet says, that God would be angry with the posterity of Esau. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-5" class="com-number"
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-002
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
그는 같은 목적으로 덧붙인다. "에돔이 우리가 줄었으나 돌아와 집을 건축하겠다고 말할지라도, 만군의 여호와가 말하노니 그들이 건축할지라도 내가 헐어버리리라." 이것으로 내가 말한 것이 확인된다 — 에돔의 후손에게는 회복의 소망이 없다는 것이다. 그들이 용기를 내어 성읍들을 재건하기 위해 부지런히 수고할지라도, 성공하지 못할 것이다. 하나님이 그들의 모든 건물을 헐어버리실 것이기 때문이다.
이 차이가 마치 살아있는 그림처럼, 유대인들이 야곱에 대한 하나님의 사랑과 에서에 대한 그분의 미움을 볼 수 있게 해주었다. 두 민족이 같은 원수에게 무너졌는데, 유대인들에게는 자유가 주어지고 에돔 사람들에게는 자국으로 돌아갈 허락이 주어지지 않은 것은 어떻게 된 일인가? 이미 말했듯이 갈대아인들은 유대인들에게 더 큰 적대감을 가지고 있었으나, 그들을 더 관대하게 대우했다. 그러므로 이 모든 것이 하나님의 놀라운 목적에 의한 것임이 분명하다. 그리하여 포로로 쫓겨날 때 폐지된 것처럼 보였던 입양이 헛되지 않았음도 나타났다.
만군의 여호와가 이렇게 말씀하신다. "그들이 건축하더라도 내가 무너뜨리리라. 그러면 그들을 '악의 국경', 여호와가 영원토록 화내실 백성이라 하리라." "악의 국경"이란 저주받은 국경을 의미한다. 마치 그분이 이렇게 말씀하시는 것 같다. "너희가 버려진 자들임이 온 세상이 그 사실 자체로 판단할 수 있도록 드러날 것이다." "여호와가 영원토록 화내시는 백성"이라고 덧붙이심으로써, 내가 말한 사랑과 미움에 대한 것을 다시 확인하신다. 하나님은 유대인들에게 에돔 사람들과 같은 정도로 진노하실 수도 있었다. 그러나 하나님이 에서의 후손에게는 완강하게 계시면서 유대인들과는 화해하실 때, 두 민족 사이의 차이가 매우 분명해진다.
"영원히"라는 말도 주목해야 한다. 하나님은 유대인들을 한동안 거부하신 것처럼 보이셨고, 선지자들도 그분이 그들에게 진노하신다고 탄식하며 같은 단어를 쓴다. 그러나 유대인들에 대한 하나님의 진노는 일시적인 것이었고, 그분은 언약을 완전히 잊지 않으셨다. 그러나 에돔 사람들에게 대한 그분의 진노는 영원했다. 그들의 아버지가 거부되었기 때문이다. 우리는 택자와 유기자 사이의 이 차이가 항상 제시됨을 안다 — 하나님이 공통으로 죄들을 심판하실 때, 그분은 항상 택자를 향한 진노를 절제하시고, 시편 89:31과 사무엘하 7:14에 말씀하신 것처럼 엄중함에 한계를 두신다. "그 자녀들이 내 율법을 지키지 아니하면 나는 막대기로 그들의 죄를 다스리리라. 그러나 나의 인자함은 그에게서 거두지 아니하리라." 그러나 유기자에 대해서는 하나님의 복수가 항상 그들을 추격하고, 항상 그들의 머리 위에 드리우며, 그들의 뼈와 골수에 박혀 있다. 이런 이유로 선지자는 하나님이 에서의 후손에게 영원히 진노하실 것이라고 말한다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-4-4(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
5절 카드 ↗
He adds, Your eyes shall see . The Jews had already begun in part to witness this spectacle, but the Prophet speaks here of what was to continue. See then shall your eyes ; that is, “As it has already appeared of what avail gratuitous election has been to you, by which I have chosen you as my people, and as ye have also seen on the other hand how it has been with your relations the Edomites, because they had been rejected in the person of their father Esau; so also this same difference shall ever be evident to you in their posterity: see then shall your eyes And ye shall say, Magnified let Jehovah be over the border of Israel ; that is, “The event itself will extort this confession, — that I greatly enhance my goodness towards you.” For though tokens of God’s grace shone forth everywhere, and the earth, as the Psalmist says, is full of his goodness, ( Psalms 104:24 ;) yet there was in Judea something special, so that.our Prophet does not in vain say, that there would be always reasons for the Jews to celebrate God’s praises on account of his bounty to them more than to the rest of the world. And the Prophet no doubt reproves here indirectly the wickedness of the people, as though he had said, — “Ye indeed, as far as you can, bury God’s benefits, or at least extenuate them; but facts themselves must draw from you this confession — that God deals bountifully with the border of Israel, that he exercises there his favor more remarkably than among any of the nations.” After having briefly referred to those benefits which ought to have filled the Jews with shame, he comes at length to the subject he had in view; for his main object, as I have already stated, was to show, that it was God’s complaint that he was deprived of his own right and in a double sense, for the Jews did not reverence him as their Father, nor fear him as their Lord. He might indeed have called himself Lord and Father by the right of creation; but he preferred, as I have already explained, to appeal to their adoption; for it was a remarkable favor, when the Lord chose some out of all the human race; and we cannot say that the cause of this was to be found in men. Whom then he designs to choose, he binds to himself by a holier bond. But if they disappoint him, wholly inexcusable is their perfidy. As we now understand the Prophet’s meaning, and the object of this expostulation, it remains for us to learn how to accommodate what is taught to ourselves. We are not indeed descended fronm Abraham or from Jacob according to the flesh; but as God has engraved on us certain marks of his adoption, by which he has distinguished us from other nations, while we were yet nothing better, we hence see that we are justly exposed to the same reproof with the Jews, if we do not respond to the calling of God. I wished thus briefly to touch on this point, in order that we may know that this doctrine is no less useful to us at this day than it was to the Jews; for though the adoption is not exactly the same, as it then belonged to one seed and to one family, yet we are not superior to others through our own worthiness, but because God has gratuitously chosen us as a people to himself. Since this has been the case, we are his; for he has redeemed us by the blood of his own Son, and by rendering us partakers, by the gospel, of a favor so ineffably great, he has made us his sons and his servants. Except then we love and reverence him as our Father, and except we fear him as our Lord, there is found in us at this day an ingratitude no less base than in that ancient people. But as I wished now only to refer to the chief point, I shall speak tomorrow, as the passage requires, on the subject of election: but it was necessary first briefly to show the Prophet’s design, as I have done; and then to treat particular points more at large, as the case may require. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-6" class="com-number"
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-002
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
그는 덧붙인다. "너희 눈으로 볼 것이라." 유대인들은 이미 부분적으로 이 광경을 목격하기 시작했지만, 선지자는 계속될 일에 대해 말한다. "너희 눈으로 볼 것이라." 즉, "이미 자유로운 선택으로 너희를 내 백성으로 택하신 것이 어떤 유익이 있었는지, 그리고 반대로 아버지 에서 안에서 거부된 너희 친족 에돔 사람들이 어떻게 되었는지를 이미 보았으니, 그들의 후손에게도 같은 차이가 항상 분명히 드러날 것이다." 그리고 너희는 말할 것이다. "이스라엘 국경 위에서 여호와는 위대하시다." 즉, "사건 자체가 이 고백을 이끌어낼 것이다 — 하나님이 너희에게 대단히 자신의 선하심을 드높이신다."
비록 하나님의 은혜의 표들이 어디서나 빛났고, 시편 104:24처럼 땅이 그분의 선하심으로 가득하지만, 유다에는 특별한 것이 있었다. 그래서 선지자는 이유 없이 유대인들이 나머지 세상보다 자신들에게 베푸신 하나님의 은혜를 인해 그분을 찬양할 이유가 항상 있을 것이라고 말하지 않는다. 선지자는 분명히 여기서 간접적으로 백성의 악함을 책망한다. 마치 그가 이렇게 말하는 것 같다. "너희는 하나님의 복들을 묻어버리거나 최소한 줄이려 하지만, 사실 자체가 너희로부터 이 고백을 이끌어낼 것이다 — 하나님이 이스라엘 국경에서 어떤 민족들보다도 더 두드러지게 자신의 호의를 베푸신다."
유대인들을 수치심으로 가득하게 해야 할 유익들을 간략히 언급한 후에, 선지자는 마침내 자신이 목표로 한 주제에 이른다. 이미 말한 것처럼 그의 주된 목적은 하나님이 자신의 권리를 두 가지 의미에서 박탈당하셨다는 그분의 불평을 보이는 것이었다. 유대인들이 아버지로서 그분을 공경하지도, 주님으로서 두려워하지도 않았기 때문이다.
창조의 권리로 그분은 주님이자 아버지라고 부르실 수 있었다. 그러나 그분은 내가 이미 설명한 것처럼 그들의 입양에 호소하는 것을 선호하셨다. 주께서 전 인류 중 일부를 선택하셨을 때 그것은 놀라운 은혜였기 때문이다. 그 원인을 사람들에게서 찾을 수 없다. 그러므로 그분이 선택하기로 결정하신 자들을 더 거룩한 유대로 묶으시는 것이다. 그들이 그분을 실망시킨다면, 그들의 배신은 전혀 변명할 수 없다.
이것이 선지자의 의미와 이 항의의 목적임을 이해했으니, 이것을 우리 자신에게 적용하는 것을 배워야 한다. 우리는 육신적으로 아브라함이나 야곱의 후손이 아니다. 그러나 하나님이 우리를 다른 민족들로부터 구별하기 위해 입양의 어떤 표들을 우리에게 새기셨으니, 우리가 하나님의 부르심에 응하지 않는다면 유대인들과 같은 책망을 받는 것이 당연하다. 우리 자신이 더 낫기 때문이 아니라, 하나님이 값없이 우리를 자신의 백성으로 선택하셨기 때문이다. 그러므로 우리는 그분의 것이다. 그분이 자신의 아들의 피로 우리를 구속하셨고, 복음으로 이루 말할 수 없이 크신 은혜에 참여자가 되게 하심으로써 우리를 자신의 자녀요 종으로 삼으셨기 때문이다. 그러므로 우리가 아버지로서 그분을 사랑하고 공경하지 않는다면, 그리고 주님으로서 그분을 두려워하지 않는다면, 저 옛 백성과 다를 바 없이 비열한 배은망덕이 우리 안에 있는 것이다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-5-5(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
6절 카드 ↗
God as already proved that he had by many favors been a Father to the Jews. They must have felt that he had indeed bound them to himself, provided they possessed any religion or gratitude. He now then concludes his address to them, as though he had said, that he had very ill bestowed all the blessings he had given them; and he adopts two similitudes; he first compares himself to a father, and then to a master. He says, that in these two respects he had a just cause to complain of the Jews; for he had been a father to them, but they did not in their turn conduct themselves as children, in a submissive and obedient manner, as they ought to have done. And farther, he became their master, but they shook off the yoke, and allowed not themselves to be ruled by his authority. As to the word, Father, we have already shown that the Jews were not only in common with others the children of God, but had been also chosen as his peculiar people. Their adoption then made them God’s children above all other nations; for when they differed nothing from the rest of the world, God adopted them. With regard to the right and power of a master, God, in the first place, held them bound to him as the Creator and former of the whole world; but he also, as it is well known, attained the right by redemption. That he might then enhance their crime, he not only expostulates with them for having abused his favors, but he charges them also with obstinacy, because they disobeyed his authority, while yet he was their Lord. He says, that a son who honors his father, and a servant his master . He applies the same verb to both clauses; but he afterwards makes a difference, ascribing honor to a father and fear to a master. As to the first clause, we know that whenever there is authority, there ought to be honor; and when masters are over servants, they ought to be honored. But in a subsequent clause he speaks more distinctly, and says, that a master ought to be feared by a servant, while honor is due to a father from a son. For servants do not love their masters; not being able to escape from their power, they fear them: but the reverence which sons have for their fathers, is more generous and more voluntary. But God shows here, that the Jews could by no means be kept to their duty, though so many favors ought to have made it their sweet delight. God had indeed conciliated them as much as possible to himself, but all was without any benefit. The majesty also of God ought to have struck them with fear. It was then the same, as though he had said, that they were of so perverse a nature, that they could not be led to obedience either by a kind and gracious invitation, or by an authoritative command. The Lord then complains that he ass deprived by the Jews of the honor which sons owe to their fathers, as well as of the fear which servants ought to have for their masters; and thus he shows that they were like untameable wild beasts, which cannot be tamed by any kind treatment, nor subdued by scourges, or by any kind of castigation. He then adds, To you, O priests . It is certain that this complaint ought not to be confined to the priests alone, since God, as we have seen, speaks generally of the whole race of Abraham: for he had said that Levi was advanced to the sacerdotal honor, while the other brethren were passed by; but he had said also, that Jacob was chosen when Esau was rejected; and this belonged in common to the twelve tribes. Now it ought not, and it could not, be confined to the tribe of Levi, that God was their father or their master. Why then does he now expressly address the priests? They ought indeed to have been leaders and teachers to the rest of the people, but he does not on this account exempt the whole people from blame or guilt, though he directs his discourse to the priests; for his object was to show that all things had become so corrupt among the people, that the priests were become as it were the chief in contempt of religion and in sacrileges, and in every kind of pollution. It hence follows that there was nothing sound and right in the community; for when the eyes themselves are without light, they cannot discharge their duty to the body, and what at length will follow? God then no doubt shows that great corruptions prevailed and had spread so much among the people, that they who ought to have been examples to others, had especially shaken off the yoke and given way to unbridled licentiousness. This then is the reason why the Prophet condemns the priests, though at the beginning he included the whole people, as it is evident from the context. We must at the same time bear in mind what we have elsewhere said -that the fault of the people was not lessened because the sin of the priest was the most grievous; but that all were involved in the same ruin; for God in this case did not absolve the common people, inasmuch as they were guilty of the same sins; but he shows that the most grievous fault belonged to the teachers, who had not reproved the people, but on the contrary increased licentiousness by their dissimulation, as we shall presently find again. He says that they despised his name ; not that the fear of God prevailed in others, but that it was the duty of the priests to reprove the impiety of the whole people. As then they allowed to others so much liberty, it appeared quite evident that the name of God was but little esteemed by them; for had they possessed true zeal, they would not have suffered the worship of God to be trodden under foot or profaned, as we shall presently find to have been the case. It then follows, Ye have said, In what have we despised thy name? As the Prophet at the beginning indirectly touched on the hypocrisy and perverseness of the people, so he now no doubt repeats the same thing by using a similar language: for how was it that the priests as well as the people asked a question on a plain matter, as though it were obscure, except that they were blind to their own vices
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
하나님은 이미 많은 유익들로 자신이 유대인들의 아버지가 되셨음을 증명하셨다. 그들에게 어떤 종교나 감사함이 있었다면, 그분이 진정으로 그들을 자신에게 묶으셨음을 느꼈어야 했다. 그러므로 그분은 그들에게 하신 모든 복들을 그들에게 주신 것이 매우 잘못되었다고 결론짓는 것처럼 그 말씀을 마무리하신다. 그분은 두 가지 비유를 사용하신다. 먼저 자신을 아버지에, 그 다음에 주인에 비교하신다. 그분은 두 가지 면에서 유대인들에게 정당한 불평의 원인이 있었다고 말씀하신다. 그분이 그들의 아버지였으나, 그들은 자녀로서 응당 해야 할 대로 순종하고 복종하는 방식으로 처신하지 않았다. 또한 그들의 주인이 되셨으나, 그들은 멍에를 벗어버리고 그분의 권위 아래 다스림 받기를 허락하지 않았다.
아버지라는 말에 대해서는 유대인들이 단지 다른 이들과 공통으로 하나님의 자녀가 된 것이 아니라, 특별한 백성으로도 선택받았음을 이미 보았다. 그들의 입양이 다른 모든 민족들 위에서 하나님의 자녀들이 되게 했다. 그들이 나머지 세상과 아무런 차이도 없었을 때 하나님이 그들을 입양하셨기 때문이다.
주인의 권리와 능력에 대해서는, 하나님이 첫째로 온 세상의 창조자요 형성자로서 그들을 자신에게 묶어두셨다. 그러나 그분은 또한 구속을 통해 그 권리를 얻으셨음도 잘 알려져 있다. 그러므로 그분의 죄를 드높이기 위해, 그분은 그들의 유익들을 남용한 것만을 책망하시는 것이 아니라, 그들이 자신의 권위에 불순종했다는 것도 책망하신다. 그분이 그들의 주님임에도.
"아들이 아버지를 공경하고 종이 주인을 공경한다." 그는 두 절에 같은 동사를 사용한다. 그러나 이후에 차이를 두어, 아버지에게는 공경을 종에게는 두려움을 귀속시킨다. 전자에 대해서는, 권위가 있는 곳에는 공경이 있어야 함을 우리는 안다. 주인이 종들 위에 있을 때 그들은 공경받아야 한다. 그러나 후속 절에서 그분은 더 분명하게 말씀하신다. 주인은 종에게 두려움을 받아야 하고, 아버지는 아들에게서 공경을 받아야 한다고. 종들은 주인들을 사랑하지 않는다. 그들의 권력을 피할 수 없으므로 두려워한다. 그러나 아들들이 아버지들에 대해 갖는 공경은 더 너그럽고 더 자발적이다.
그러나 하나님은 여기서, 이렇게 많은 유익들이 그들의 달콤한 즐거움이 되었어야 함에도, 유대인들을 그들의 의무에 붙들어두기가 어려웠음을 보이신다. 하나님은 가능한 한 최대로 그들을 자신에게 화해시키려 하셨으나, 아무런 유익이 없었다. 하나님의 위엄도 그들로 하여금 두려움으로 치게 해야 했다. 마치 그분이 말씀하시는 것과 같다 — 그들이 본성이 이토록 패역하여, 친절하고 은혜로운 초대로도, 권위 있는 명령으로도 순종으로 이끌 수 없었다고. 그러므로 주께서는 유대인들이 아들들이 아버지에게 빚진 공경과, 종들이 주인에게 가져야 할 두려움을 박탈했다고 불평하신다. 이렇게 그분은 그들이 온갖 친절한 대우로도 길들여질 수 없고, 채찍질이나 어떤 형벌로도 다스려지지 않는 사나운 야수 같음을 보이신다.
그런 다음 그분은 덧붙이신다. "제사장들아, 너희에게 해당한다." 이 불평이 제사장들에게만 국한되어야 하는 것은 분명 아니다. 하나님은 우리가 보았듯이 아브라함 온 족속에 대해 일반적으로 말씀하셨기 때문이다. 레위가 형제들을 제치고 제사장직으로 높여졌다고 말씀하셨고, 야곱이 에서가 거부될 때 선택되었다고도 말씀하셨다. 이것은 열두 지파 전체에 공통으로 해당한다. 하나님이 그들의 아버지요 주인이라는 것이 레위 지파에게만 국한될 수 없었다.
그렇다면 왜 그분은 이제 제사장들을 명시적으로 언급하시는가? 그들이 나머지 백성에게 지도자요 교사가 되어야 했지만, 그분이 모든 백성을 비난이나 죄책에서 제외시키는 것은 아니다. 그분의 목적은 백성 가운데 모든 것이 이토록 부패해져서, 종교에 대한 경멸과 신성 모독과 모든 종류의 오염에서 제사장들이 으뜸이 되었음을 보이는 것이었다. 그러므로 공동체에 건전하고 바른 것이 없다는 것이 따라온다. 눈 자체가 빛이 없을 때 몸에 대한 기능을 할 수 없는데, 어떤 결과가 따를 것인가? 하나님은 백성 사이에 큰 부패가 만연하여 퍼져 있으므로, 다른 이들에게 본보기가 되었어야 할 자들이 특히 멍에를 벗어버리고 방자함에 빠졌음을 보이신다. 제사장들이 정죄되는 이유가 바로 이것이다.
그분은 그들이 그분의 이름을 멸시했다고 말씀하신다. 다른 이들에게는 하나님에 대한 두려움이 있지 않았으나, 제사장들은 백성을 책망해야 할 의무가 있었다. 그들이 남에게 그렇게 큰 자유를 허용했으므로, 하나님의 이름이 그들에게 별로 대단하지 않게 여겨졌음이 분명히 드러났다. 진정한 열정이 있었다면, 그들은 하나님의 예배가 발밑에 짓밟히거나 더럽혀지도록 내버려두지 않았을 것이다.
"어찌 우리가 주의 이름을 멸시하였나이까?" 선지자가 처음에 간접적으로 백성의 위선과 패역함을 지적한 것처럼, 이제 비슷한 언어를 사용하여 같은 것을 반복한다. 제사장들도 백성도 분명한 문제에 대해 마치 모호한 것처럼 질문했다. 그들이 자신의 악함에 눈이 멀지 않고서야 어떻게 이렇게 할 수 있었겠는가?
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-6-6(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
7절 카드 ↗
It was indeed the office of the priests to place bread daily on the table; but whence could bread be obtained except some were offered? Now nothing was lost to the priests, when they daily set bread before God, for they presently received it; and thus they preferred, as it was more to their advantage, to offer bread well approved, made of fine flour: but as I have said, their own convenience interposed, for they thought that they could not prevail with the people — “If we irritate these men, they will deny that they have anything to offer; and thus the temple will be empty, and our own houses will be empty; it is then better to take coarse bread from them than nothing; we shall at least feed our families and servants with this bread, after having offered it to the Lord.” We hence see how the fault belonged to the priests, when the people offered polluted bread, and unapproved victims. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-8" class="com-number"
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
제사장들의 직무는 매일 빵을 상에 올려놓는 것이었다. 그러나 어떤 것이 드려지지 않으면 빵을 어디서 구할 수 있었겠는가? 제사장들은 하나님 앞에 매일 빵을 차릴 때 손해를 보는 것이 없었다. 그들은 곧 그것을 돌려받았기 때문이다. 그들은 자신들에게 더 유리하므로, 고운 밀가루로 만든 잘 다듬어진 빵을 드리는 것을 선호했다. 그러나 이미 말했듯이 자신들의 편의가 개입되었다. "이 사람들을 자극하면 드릴 것이 없다고 할 것이고, 그러면 성전도 비고 우리 집도 비게 될 것이다. 그러므로 아무것도 받지 않는 것보다 거친 빵이라도 받는 것이 낫다. 적어도 주님께 드린 후에 우리 가족과 종들을 이 빵으로 먹일 수 있을 것이다." 그러므로 백성이 부정한 빵과 허용되지 않는 희생 제물을 드릴 때 그 과실이 제사장들에게 속했음을 알 수 있다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-7-7(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
8절 카드 ↗
I have hitherto explained the Prophet’s words with reference chiefly to the shew-bread; not that they ought to be so strictly taken as many interpreters have considered them; for under the name of bread is included, we know, every kind of eatables; so it seems probable to me that the word ought to be extended to all the sacrifices; but one kind is here mentioned as an example; and it seems also that what immediately follows is added as an explanation — ye offer the lame and the blind and the mutilated . Since these things are connected together, I have no doubt but that God means by bread here every kind of offering, and we know that the shew-bread was not offered on the altar; but there was a table by itself appointed for this purpose near the altar. And why God designates by bread all the sacrifices may be easily explained; for God would have sacrifices offered to him as though he had his habitation and table among the Jews; it was not indeed his purpose to fill their minds with gross imaginations, as though he did eat or drink, as we know that heathens have been deluded with such notions; but his design was only to remind the Jews of that domestic habitation which he had chosen for himself among them. But more on this subject shall presently be said; I shall now proceed to consider the words. Ye offer on my altar polluted bread; and ye have said, In what have we polluted thee? The priests again answer as though God unjustly accused them; for they allege their innocency, as the question is to be regarded here as a denial: In what then have we polluted thee? They deny that they were rightly condemned, inasmuch as they had duly served God. But we may hence conclude, according to what has been before stated, that the people were under the influence of gross hypocrisy, and had become hardened in their obstinacy. It is the same at this day; though there be such a mass of crimes, which everywhere prevails in the world, and even overflows the earth, yet no one will bear to be condemned; for every one looks on others, and thus when no less grievous sins appear in others, every one absolves himself. This is then the sottishness which the Prophet again goads — Ye have said, In what have we polluted thee? He and other Prophets no doubt charged the Jews with this sacrilege — that they polluted the name of God. But it deserves to be known, that few think that they pollute God and his name when they worship him superstitiously or formally, as though they had to do with a child: but we see that God himself declares, that the whole of religion is profaned, and that his name is shamefully polluted when men thus trifle with him. He answers, when ye said , literally, in your saying, The table of Jehovah, it is contemptible . Here the Prophet discovers the fountain of their sin; and he shows as it were by the finger, that they had despised those rites which belonged to the worship of God. The reason follows, If ye offer the blind , he says, for sacrifice, it is no evil . Some read the last clause as a question, “is it not evil?” but he, the mark of a question, is not here; and we may easily gather from the context that the Prophet as yet relates how presumptuously both the priests and the whole people thought they could be acquitted and obtain pardon for themselves, “It is no evil thing if the lame be offered, if the blind be offered, if the maimed be offered; there is nothing evil in all this.” (203) We now then understand what the Prophet means. But the subject would have been obscure had not a fuller explanation been given in these words, The table of Jehovah, it is contemptible (204) God does here show, as I have before stated, why he was so much displeased with the Jews. Nothing is indeed so precious as his worship; and he had instituted under the law sacrifices and other rites, that the children of Abraham might exercise themselves in worshipping him spiritually. It was then the same as though he had said, that he cared nothing for sheep and calves, and for any thing of that kind, but that their impiety was sufficiently manifested, inasmuch as they did not think that the whole of religion was despised when they despised the external acts of worship according to the law. God then brings back the attention of the Jews from brute animals to himself, as though he had said, “Ye offer to me lame and blind animals, which I have forbidden to be offered; that you act unfaithfully towards me is sufficiently apparent; and if ye say that these are small things and of no moment, I answer, that you ought to have regarded the end for which I designed that sacrifices should be offered to me, and ordered bread to be laid on my table in the sanctuary; for by these tokens you ought to have known that I live in the midst of you, and that whatever ye eat or drink is sacred to me, and that all you possess comes to you through my bounty. As then this end for which sacrifices have been appointed has been neglected by you, it is quite evident that ye have no care nor concern for true religion. We now then perceive why the Prophet objects to the priests, that they had called the table of Jehovah contemptible; not that they had spoken thus expressly, but because they had regarded it almost as nothing to pervert and adulterate the whole of divine worship according to the law, which was an evidence of religion when there was any. Now it may seem strange, that God one while so strictly requires pure sacrifices and urges the observance of them, when yet at another time he says that he does not seek sacrifices, “Sacrifice I desire not, but mercy,” ( Hosea 6:6 ;) and again, “Have I commanded your fathers when I delivered them from Egypt, to offer victims to me? With this alone was I content, that they should obey my voice.” He says afterwards in Micah, “Shall I be propitious to you if ye offer me all your flocks? but rather, O man, humble thyself before thy God.” ( Micah 6:6 .) The same is said in the fiftieth Psalm, in the first a
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
나는 지금까지 선지자의 말들을 주로 진설병과 관련하여 설명했다. 많은 해석자들이 엄격하게 받아들인 것처럼 그 말들이 그렇게 좁게 적용되어야 하는 것이 아니기 때문이다. "빵"이라는 이름 아래 모든 종류의 식물이 포함된다는 것을 알고 있다. 그러므로 그 말이 모든 제물로 확장되어야 한다는 것이 타당해 보인다. 그러나 한 종류가 예로 언급되었고, 이어지는 것이 해설로 덧붙여진 것 같다 — 즉, 너희는 절름발이와 눈먼 것과 병든 것을 드린다는 것이다.
이것들이 서로 연결되어 있으므로, 하나님이 여기서 빵으로 모든 종류의 예물을 의미하신다는 것은 의심할 바 없다. 제단에 진설병이 드려지지 않았음은 우리가 안다. 그 목적을 위해 제단 옆에 별도의 상이 있었다. 하나님이 모든 제물을 빵으로 부르시는 이유는 쉽게 설명된다. 하나님은 마치 그분이 유대인들 사이에 거하시고 그분의 상이 그들 가운데 있는 것처럼 제물들이 자신에게 드려지기를 원하셨다. 이방인들이 그런 개념에 미혹된 것처럼 그분이 먹거나 마신다는 거친 생각들로 그들의 마음을 채우려는 것이 아니었다. 그분의 의도는 오직 유대인들에게 자신이 그들 사이에 선택하신 가정적인 거소를 상기시키는 것이었다.
"너희가 내 제단에 부정한 떡을 드리고 말하기를 우리가 어떻게 주를 더럽혔나이까 하는도다." 제사장들은 마치 하나님이 부당하게 정죄하시는 것처럼 다시 답한다. 그들은 자신들의 결백을 주장한다. 질문이 여기서 부정으로 봐야 하기 때문이다. "그러면 우리가 어떻게 주를 더럽혔습니까?" 그들은 하나님을 적절히 섬겼으므로 정당하게 정죄받지 않는다고 부인한다. 이로써 우리는 이미 말한 것처럼 백성이 극도의 위선의 영향 아래 있었고 완고함 속에 굳어졌다는 것을 알 수 있다.
그는 답하신다. "너희가 말하기를 여호와의 상은 경멸할 것이라 할 때라." 여기서 선지자는 그들의 죄의 근원을 드러낸다. 그리고 율법에 속한 예배의 의식들을 그들이 경멸했음을 말하자면 손가락으로 가리킨다. 그 이유가 이어진다. "눈먼 희생을 드리는 것이 어찌 악하지 아니하냐." 어떤 이들은 마지막 절을 의문문으로 읽는다. 그러나 문맥으로부터 쉽게 알 수 있는 것은 선지자가 여기서 제사장들과 온 백성이 얼마나 뻔뻔스럽게 자신들이 무죄 방면되고 용서받을 수 있다고 생각했는지를 계속 전하고 있다는 것이다. "절름발이를 드리는 것은 악하지 않고, 눈먼 것을 드리는 것도 악하지 않고, 병든 것을 드리는 것도 악하지 않다."
"여호와의 상은 경멸할 것이라"는 말이 선지자가 유대인들이 하나님을 이토록 불쾌하게 여긴 이유를 보인다는 것을 이미 말했다. 율법에 따라 제물과 다른 의식들을 제정하신 것은, 아브라함의 자녀들이 그 안에서 영적으로 하나님을 예배하는 훈련을 받도록 하기 위한 것이었다. 따라서 그분이 양과 송아지나 그와 같은 것을 전혀 원하지 않으신다고 말하는 것은 마치 그들의 불경건이 충분히 나타났다고 말하는 것과 같다. 그들은 율법에 따른 예배의 외적 행위들을 경멸할 때 온 종교가 경멸당한다고 생각하지 않았기 때문이다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-8-8(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
9절 카드 ↗
He wounds here the priests more grievously, — because they had so degenerated as to be wholly unworthy of their honorable office and title; “Go,” he says, “and entreat the face of God . ” All this is ironical; for interpreters are much mistaken who think that the Prophet here exhorts the priests humbly to ask pardon from God, both for themselves and for the people. On the contrary, he addresses them, as I have said, ironically, while telling them to be intercessors and mediators between God and the people; and yet they were profane men, who on their part polluted the whole worship of God, and thus subverted the whole of religion: go thou and entreat , he says, the face of God . This duty, we know, was enjoined on the priests; they were to draw nigh to the sanctuary and present themselves before God as though they were advocates pleading the cause of the people, or at least intercessors to pacify God. Since then they were in this respect the types of Christ, it behoved them to strive themselves to be holy; and though the people abandoned themselves to all kinds of wickedness, it yet became the priests to devote themselves with all reverence to the duties of their calling; and as God had preferred them to their brethren, they ought especially to have consecrated themselves to him with all fear; for the more excellent their condition was, the more eminent ought to have been their piety and holiness. Justly then does the Prophet here inveigh so severely against them, because they did not consider that they were honored with the priesthood, that they might entreat God, and thus pacify his wrath, and reconcile to him miserable men: Go, he says, and entreat the face of God ; forsooth! he will accept your face . We now understand the real meaning of the Prophet. And now , he says, he will have mercy on us . Here also the Prophet derides them, because they boasted that they could prevail through their own high dignity to render God propitious; forsooth! he says, he will have mercy on us . But this is done by your hand , i.e., by you. “Do ye raise up your hands to God? and will he on seeing you be pacified towards you? As then ye are polluted, ye are unworthy of the honor and office, in which ye so proudly glory.” He does not however, as we have already said, extenuate the fault of the people, and much less does he exempt them from guilt who were implicated in the same crimes; but he shows that the state of things was wholly desperate; for the common people disregarded God, and the priests, neglecting to make any distinctions, received every sort of victims, only that they might not be in want: he shows them that the state of the people was extremely bad, as there was no one who could, according to what his office required, pacify God. Will he then receive your face ? The Prophet seems to allude to the person of the Mediator; for as Christ had not as yet appeared, when the priest presented himself before the altar, it was the same as though God looked on the face of one, and became thus propitious to all. On this account he says, that the priests were not worthy that God should look on them, since they had polluted his sanctuary and corrupted his whole service. (205) For the same purpose he subjoins — (205) It is generally admitted that this verse is ironical. The second line has been differently interpreted: some regard the impure sacrifices before mentioned as being referred to, “from your hand have these come,” following the Septuagint , where זאת is rendered “ ταυτα — these:” but the most obvious meaning is that given by Calvin , that the sentence is a concession as to what the priests are ironically exhorted to do. I give the following version, — And now, intreat now God’s face that he may favor us; By you ( literally by your hand) has this been done: Will he on your account lift up the face? Saith Jehovah of hosts. To “lift up the face” is to show favor. The words seem to be spoken by the Prophet, and by saying, “saith Jehovah,” at the end, he identifies what he says with the mind of God, as though he said that what he addressed to them was communicated to him from above. Instead of מכם , “on your account,” some MS., have לכם , “for you,” or “for your sake.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-10" class="com-number"
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
여기서 그분은 제사장들을 더 심하게 찌르신다 — 그들이 이토록 타락하여 그들의 영예로운 직분과 직함에 전혀 합당하지 않기 때문이다. "가라, 하나님의 얼굴을 간구하라." 이것은 모두 반어적이다. 해석자들은 선지자가 여기서 제사장들에게 자신들과 백성을 위해 하나님께 겸손히 사죄하도록 권면한다고 생각하는데, 크게 잘못되었다. 오히려 이미 말한 것처럼 반어적으로 그들에게 말하는 것이다. 그들이 하나님과 백성 사이의 중보자요 중재자가 되어야 한다고 말하면서도, 그들은 하나님의 온 예배를 자신들이 더럽히고 이렇게 온 종교를 무너뜨린 세속적인 사람들이라는 것이다. "가서 간구하라." 그분은 말씀하신다. "하나님의 얼굴을."
이 의무가 제사장들에게 부과되었음을 우리는 안다. 그들은 성소 앞에 나아가 마치 백성의 사건을 변론하는 변호인이나 하나님의 노를 풀어드리는 중보자로서 하나님 앞에 자신들을 드려야 했다. 그들이 이 면에서 그리스도의 모형이었으므로, 그들 자신이 거룩하도록 힘써야 했다. 비록 백성이 모든 종류의 악함에 자신들을 버릴지라도, 제사장들은 자신들의 직무에 모든 공경으로 헌신해야 했다. 하나님이 그들을 형제들보다 더 우선시하셨으므로, 그들은 특히 모든 두려움으로 그분께 자신들을 드려야 했다. 그들의 상태가 더 탁월할수록 그들의 경건과 거룩함은 더욱 두드러져야 했다. 그러므로 선지자는 그들이 중보자의 역할을 하고 하나님의 진노를 풀어드리며 비참한 사람들을 그분과 화해시키도록 제사장직으로 영화롭게 되었음을 생각하지 않은 것에 대해 이렇게 심하게 공격하는 것이 당연하다. "가서 하나님의 얼굴을 간구하라!" 그리하면 "그가 너희에게 은혜를 베풀 것이다."
"이제 하나님이 우리에게 은혜를 베푸시겠다." 여기서도 선지자는 그들을 조롱한다. 그들이 자신들의 높은 권위로 하나님이 자신들에게 은혜로우시도록 할 수 있다고 자랑했기 때문이다. 그분이 우리에게 은혜를 베푸신다! "그러나 이것이 너희의 손에 의한 것이라." 즉, 너희에 의한 것이다. "너희가 손을 들어 하나님께 올린다. 그분이 너희를 보실 때 너희로 인해 화해하실 것인가? 너희가 오염되었으므로 너희가 자랑하는 영예와 직분에 합당하지 않다." 그러나 이미 말한 것처럼, 그분은 같은 죄에 연루된 자들을 죄책에서 제외시키지 않으신다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-9-9(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
10절 카드 ↗
He goes on with the same subject, — that the priests conducted themselves very shamefully in their office, and that the people had become hardened through their example, so that the whole of religion was disregarded. Hence he says, that the doors were not closed by them. Some interpreters connect the two things together — that they closed not the doors of the temple, nor kindled the altar for nothing; and thus they apply the adverb, חנם , chenam , to both clauses; as though he had said, that they were hirelings, who did not freely devote themselves to serve God, but looked for profit and gain in everything: and this is the commonly received explanation. (206) But it seems better to me to take them separately and to say, Who does even shut the doors? not however for nothing, and the copulative, ו , vau , as in many other places, may be rendered even : and yet ye kindle not for nothing my altar ; as though God had said, “I have fixed your works; ye are then to me as hired servants; and now since I have ordered a reward to be given to you whenever ye stand at my altar, why do ye not close my door?” Some render חנם , chenam , in vain, and give this explanation “Who closes the doors? then kindle not afterwards in vain my altar;” as though God rejected the whole service, which had been corrupted by the avarice or the sloth of the priests, and by the presumption of the people. It is indeed certain that it is better to separate the two clauses so that the adverb, חנם , chenam , may be confined to the letter; but there may yet, as I have said, be a two-fold meaning. If we render, חנם , chenam , in vain the import is that the Prophet declares that they labored to no purpose while they thus sacrificed to God contrary to his law for they ought to have attended especially to the rule prescribed to them: as then they despised this, he justly says, “Offer not to me in vain;” and thus the future tense is to be taken for the imperative, as we know is the case sometimes in Hebrew. But no interpreter seems to have sufficiently considered the reason why the Prophet speaks of not closing the doors of the temple. The priests, we know were set over the temple for this reason — that nothing polluted might be admitted; for there were of the Levites some doorkeepers, and others stood at the entrance; in short, all had their stations: and then when they had brought in the victim it was the office of the priests to examine it and to see that it was such as the law of God required. As then it was their special office to see that nothing polluted should be received into the temple of God, he justly complains here that they indiscriminately received what was faulty and profane: hence he rightly declares (for this seems to me to be the true exposition) “Offer not in vain.” He then draws the conclusion, that the priests lost all their labor in thus sacrificing, because God would not have his name profaned, and justly preferred obedience to all sacrifices. He therefore denies that they did any good in slaying victims, because they ought in the first place to have attended to this — not to change anything in God’s word and not to deviate from it in the least. But I cannot now proceed farther. (206) Adopted by Jerome , Cyril , and in our version, and by Henry , Scott , Adam Clarke , and Henderson . But Marckius takes another view, previously taken by Drusius , Gataker , and Cocceius , according to the following version — Who is there moreover among you? let him even close the doors, That ye may not kindle my altar in vain. “What he seems to say is this,” observes Drusius , “I wish there were some one so inflamed by a pious zeal, as to close the doors, and thus to exclude all unlawful sacrifices.” To kindle or light the altar was to light the fire under it to consume the sacrifice. The Targum favors “in vain,” or to no purpose, “Offer ye not on my altar an execrable oblation.” The word הכם is used in both senses — “for nothing” or without gain, Genesis 29:15 ; Exodus 21:2 ,—and “in vain” or uselessly, Proverbs 1:27 ; Ezekiel 6:10 It is difficult to know which of these views is the right one. What seems against our version is the negative לא in the second line. The sense given would be better brought out without it; and so Jerome leaves it out in his explanation. The form also of the sentence being changed renders it improbable that חנם belongs to the former clause. The version of Drusius comes nearest to the original, and is countenanced by the Septuagint and the Targum . — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-11" class="com-number"
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
그분은 같은 주제를 계속하신다 — 제사장들이 그들의 직무에서 매우 수치스럽게 처신했고, 백성이 그들의 예를 통해 굳어졌으므로, 온 종교가 무시당했다는 것이다. 그러므로 그분은 말씀하신다. 문들이 그들에 의해 닫히지 않았다고. 어떤 해석자들은 두 가지를 연결하여, 그들이 성전 문들을 닫지도 않았고 헛되이 불을 피우지도 않았다고 읽는다. 이렇게 그들은 부사를 두 절 모두에 적용한다. 마치 그들이 모든 것에서 이득과 유익을 바라보며 하나님을 자유로이 섬기지 않은 삯꾼이었다는 것처럼.
내게는 이것들을 분리하여, "누가 문이라도 닫겠느냐?"고 말하고, 그것이 헛되이가 아닌 것으로 읽는 것이 더 타당해 보인다. 연결사 ו(바브)가 여러 곳에서처럼 "심지어"로 번역될 수 있기 때문이다. "헛되이 내 제단에 불도 피우지 말라." 마치 하나님이 말씀하시는 것 같다. "나는 너희의 봉사들을 고정해 두었다. 너희는 내게 고용된 종들과 같다. 이제 내가 너희가 내 제단에 서있을 때마다 보상을 주도록 명령해 두었는데, 왜 너희는 내 문을 닫지 않느냐?" 어떤 이들은 "헛되이"를 "무익하게"로 번역하며 이렇게 설명한다. "문을 닫아라, 그리고 내 제단에 무익하게 불을 피우지 말라." 마치 하나님이 제사장들의 탐욕이나 게으름과 백성의 오만에 의해 부패된 모든 봉사를 거부하시는 것처럼. 그러나 두 절을 분리하는 것이 더 낫다.
선지자가 제사장들의 의무에 대해 성전 문들을 닫는 것에 대해 말하는 이유를 어떤 해석자도 충분히 고려하지 않은 것 같다. 제사장들은 성전에 임명되었는데, 이는 아무 오염된 것도 들어오지 않도록 하기 위해서였다. 레위인 중 문지기들이 있었고, 다른 이들은 입구에 서 있었으며, 요컨대 모두에게 자신의 자리가 있었다. 그리고 희생제물을 가져왔을 때 제사장들의 직무는 그것을 검사하여 하나님의 율법이 요구하는 것인지 확인하는 것이었다. 그러므로 오염된 것이 성전에 들어오지 않도록 하는 것이 그들의 특별한 직무였으므로, 그분은 그들이 무엇이든 결점 있고 세속적인 것을 구별 없이 받아들였다고 정당하게 불평하신다. 그러므로 그분은 정당하게 선포하신다 — "헛되이 드리지 말라." 그는 제사장들이 이렇게 제물을 드리는 것이 모든 수고를 잃는 것이라는 결론을 이끌어내신다. 하나님이 자신의 이름이 더럽혀지기를 원하시지 않으셨기 때문이다. 모든 제물보다 순종을 당연히 선호하신다. 그러므로 그분은 희생제물들을 죽이는 것이 아무런 유익이 없다고 부인하신다. 그들이 첫째로 이것에 주의해야 했기 때문이다 — 하나님의 말씀에서 아무것도 바꾸지 않는 것, 그리고 조금도 벗어나지 않는 것이.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-10-10(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
11절 카드 ↗
Here God shows that he no longer cared for the Jews, for he would bid altars to be reared for him everywhere and through all parts of the world, that he might be purely worshipped by all nations. It is indeed a remarkable prophecy as to the calling of the Gentiles; but we must especially remember this, — that whenever the Prophets speak of this calling, they promise the spread of God’s worship as a favor to the Jews, or as a punishment and reproach. The Prophets then promised to the Jews that the Gentiles would become allied to them; so does Zechariah, “In that day lay hold shall ten men on the skirt of the garment, and will say to a Jew, Be thou our leader; for the same God with thee will we worship.” ( Zechariah 8:23 .) It would have been then the highest honor to the Jews had they become teachers to all nations, so as to instruct them in true religion. So also Isaiah says, that is, that those who were before aliens would become the disciples of the chosen people, so that they would willingly submit to their teaching. But as the Jews have fallen from their place, the Gentiles have succeeded and occupied their position. Hence it is that the Prophets when speaking of the calling of the Gentiles, often denounce it as a punishment on the Jews; as though they had said, that when they were repudiated there would be other children of God, whom he would substitute in their place, according to what Christ threatened to the men of his age, “Taken away from you shall be the kingdom of God, and shall be given to another nation.” ( Matthew 21:43 .) Such is this prophecy: for our Prophet does not simply open to the Gentiles the temple of God, to connect them with the Jews and to unite them in true religion; but he first excludes the Jews, and shows that the worship of God would be exercised in common by the Gentiles, for the doctrine of salvation would be propagated to the utmost extremities of the earth. This difference ought to be noticed, which interpreters have not observed, and yet it is what is very necessary to be known; and for want of knowing this has it happened that passages wholly different have been indiscriminately blended together. The Prophet then does not here promise, as we have often stated in other places, that the whole world would be subject to God, so that true religion would everywhere prevail, but he brands the Jews with reproach, as though he had said, “God has repudiated you, but he will find other sons for himself, who will occupy your place.” He had repudiated in the last verse their sacrifices, and we know how haughtily the Jews gloried in the holiness of their race. As then they were inflated with so much pride, they thought that God would be no God except he had them as his holy Church. The Prophet here answers them, and anticipates their objection by saying, that God’s name would be celebrated through the whole world: “Ye are a few people, all the nations will unite in one body to worship God together; God then will not stand in need of you, and after he rejects you his kingdom will not decay. Ye indeed think that his kingdom cannot be safe, and that his glory will perish except he is worshipped by you; but I now declare to you, that the worship of God will flourish everywhere, even after he shall cast you out of his family.” We now then see what the Prophet means when he says, that Great will be the name of God from the rising to the setting of the sun (208) It is simply said in Psalms 113:3 “From the rising to the setting of the sun wonderful shall be the name of God.” There indeed it is only a promise, but here the Prophet includes the punishment which the Jews had deserved, as though he had said, that after they were rejected by God on account of their ingratitude, the Gentiles would become holy to God, because he would adopt them instead of that wicked and ungodly people. But I have said, that the calling of the Gentiles is here clearly proved, or may with certainty be elicited from this prophecy, for this reason, because the name of God cannot be great without the teaching of the truth. It is therefore the same thing as though the Prophet had said, that the law which had been given to the Jews would be proclaimed among all nations, so that true religion might spread everywhere: for the basis of true religion is to know how he is to be worshipped by us, inasmuch as obedience is better than all sacrifices. And it is necessary always to begin with this principle — to know the God whom we worship: and hence Christ himself, in the fourth chapter of John, condemns all the religions which then prevailed in the world, because men presumptuously worshipped gods devised by themselves. Since then it is necessary that the worship of God should be based on the truth, then God declares that his name would become renowned in every place, he doubtless shows that his law would be known to all nations, so that his will might be known everywhere, which is, as we have said, the only rule of true religion. He afterwards adds — Everywhere shall be offered incense to my name, and a clean offering . Why? Because my name shall be great . The repetition is not useless; for it was a thing then incredible, inasmuch as God had not in vain separated the Jews from the rest of the world; nor was it an ordinary commendation, when Moses said in the fourth chapter of Deuteronomy — “Show me a nation to whom God draws nigh as lie does to you: this then is your nobility and your excellency, to have a God nigh and friendly to you.” Hence also it is said in Psalms 147:20 — “He has not done thus to other nations; his judgments has he not made known to them.” It was then the peculiar privilege of the race of Abraham that God was known and worshipped by them. The very novelty, then, of what is here said might have closed the door against this prophecy; and this is the reason why the Prophet repeatedly confirms what it was then difficult to believe — the name of God, he says, shall be great in every plac
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
여기서 하나님은 더 이상 유대인들에게 관심이 없으심을 보이신다. 그분은 자신을 위해 사방에, 온 세상을 통해 제단들이 세워져서 모든 민족에 의해 순수하게 예배받으실 것이기 때문이다. 이것은 이방인들의 부르심에 관한 놀라운 예언이다. 그러나 우리는 이것을 특히 기억해야 한다 — 선지자들이 이 부르심에 대해 말할 때, 그들은 하나님의 예배의 확장을 유대인들에게 호의로 약속하거나 또는 형벌과 책망으로 말한다.
선지자들은 이방인들이 유대인들과 연합하게 될 것을 약속했다. 스가랴도 그러하다. "그 날에 열 사람이 잡을 것이라. 모든 언어의 사람들이 유대인의 옷자락을 잡을 것이라. 우리도 너희와 함께 가겠노니 하나님이 너희와 함께 하심을 들었음이라." 이방인들이 선택된 백성의 제자들이 되어 그들의 가르침에 기꺼이 복종하게 될 것이므로, 유대인들에게는 모든 민족의 교사가 되는 것이 최고의 영예가 되었을 것이다. 이사야도 마찬가지이다.
그러나 유대인들이 자신들의 자리에서 쫓겨났으므로, 이방인들이 그들을 계승하여 그 위치를 차지했다. 이런 이유로 선지자들이 이방인들의 부르심에 대해 말할 때, 종종 그것을 유대인들에 대한 형벌로 선포한다. 마치 그들이 거부될 때 하나님은 다른 하나님의 자녀들을 대신 두실 것이라고 말하는 것처럼. 그리스도가 당시의 사람들에게 위협하신 것처럼, "하나님의 나라가 너희에게서 빼앗기고 그 열매 맺는 민족에게 주어지리라."
이 예언이 그러하다. 선지자는 단순히 유대인들과 연합하도록 하나님의 성전을 이방인들에게 열어 그들을 참된 종교에서 연합시키는 것이 아니다. 먼저 유대인들을 제외하고, 하나님의 예배가 구원의 교훈이 땅 끝까지 전파될 것이므로 이방인들 사이에서 공통으로 행해질 것임을 보인다.
"동쪽에서부터 서쪽까지 내 이름이 열방 중에서 크게 될 것이라." 반복은 무의미하지 않다. 당시 믿기 어려운 것이었기 때문이다. 하나님이 유대인들을 나머지 세상으로부터 구별하신 것은 이유가 없지 않았다. 또한 신명기 4장에서 모세가 말한 것처럼 "우리가 그에게 기도할 때마다 우리 하나님 여호와께서 우리에게 가까이 하심이 어느 민족에게 이런 일이 있느냐? 이것이 너희의 영광이요 탁월함이니, 가까이 계시며 친절하신 하나님을 갖는 것이다." 시편 147:20에도 마찬가지다. "그분은 다른 어떤 나라에도 이와 같이 하지 아니하셨으며 그들은 그의 법도들을 알지 못하였도다."
그러므로 그분의 이름이 어디서나 크게 된다는 것이 반복 확인되는 이유가 있다. 우리는 하나님의 이름이 진리의 가르침 없이 크게 될 수 없음을 이 예언에서 확실하게 증명할 수 있다. 그러므로 그분이 율법이 모든 민족에게 선포되어 참된 종교가 어디서나 퍼지게 될 것임을 선포하시는 것과 같다. 참된 종교의 기초는 우리가 어떻게 그분을 예배해야 하는지 아는 것이기 때문이다.
"각처에서 향이 내 이름 앞에 드려질 것이라, 청결한 예물도." "어찌하여?" "내 이름이 열방 중에서 크게 될 것임이라." 위에서 말씀하신 것이 아직 믿기 어려웠으므로 반복이 무의미하지 않다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-11-11(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
12절 카드 ↗
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, ניב , nib , word, and bring this passage from Isaiah, “I have created the fruit of the lips, peace, peace,” ( Isaiah 57:19 .) The verb, נוב , nub , means to fructify; hence, ניב , 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, ניבו , 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. (210) 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 touch
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
이 절은 제사장들에게만 국한될 수도 있고, 전 백성에게 확장될 수도 있다. 두 가지 모두 적절하기 때문이다. 내 견해로는, 선지자가 여기서 특히 제사장들을 더 심하게 책망하면서도 동시에 일반 백성에게도 그 책망을 확장한다는 것을 의심하지 않는다. 어제 강의에서 종교가 제사장들에 의해 어떻게 오염되었는지, 그리고 그들이 하나님의 예배를 얼마나 불경스럽게 더럽혔는지를 보았다. 그러나 이것은 우리가 곧 보게 될 것처럼 온 백성의 공통된 죄였다.
"너희가 내 이름을 더럽혔다." 그 이유가 주어지고 동시에 그들의 죄가 부각된다. 그들은 하나님이 자신들을 이방인들과 동일한 수준에 놓으실 뿐 아니라, 그들을 거부하시고 자신들 대신 이방인들을 들이신다고 불평할 수 있었다. 하나님은 그들을 의절하고 이방인들을 자녀로 입양할 정당한 이유가 있으셨음을 보이신다. 그들이 하나님의 이름을 더럽혔기 때문이다. 동시에 "이제까지 나를 경멸하고 내 이름이 알려지지 않은 이방인들이 곧 믿음으로 나아올 것이며, 이렇게 내 이름이 모든 민족 사이에 크게 경배받을 것이다. 그러나 너희는 그것을 더럽혔다"고 말씀하심으로써 그들의 죄를 더욱 부각시키신다. 율법의 교훈으로 특별히 선택되고 조명된 유대인들이 이렇게 뻔뻔스럽게 하나님의 예배를 더럽혀 그분을 경멸한 것처럼 보인 반면, 이방인들은 초심자로서 진리의 종교를 맛보자마자 하나님께 순종하여 그분의 영광이 그들로 말미암아 빛났다는 것은 분명히 이상한 일이었다.
그는 그 다음으로 어떻게 하나님의 이름이 더럽혀졌는지를 보이신다. "너희가 여호와의 상이 더럽다고 말하여." 즉, 너희는 거룩한 것과 세속적인 것을 구별하지 않는다는 것이다. 어제 언급한 것을 반복하신다 — 유대인들이 하나님이 모든 공경으로 예배받아야 한다고 선지자들이 가르칠 때 그것을 사소한 것으로 여겼다는 것이다.
그들이 공개적으로 하나님의 상이 더럽혀졌다는 신성모독을 표현했다고 보기는 어렵다. 그러나 그들이 성전이나 제단이나 상에 대한 경외가 전혀 없이 돼지처럼 자신들의 불결함을 가지고 성전에 나아왔다는 것이 쉽게 결론지어진다. 이런 의미에서 선지자의 말들이 이해되어야 한다. "그 과실은 경멸할 음식이라." 어떤 이들은 이것을 "말" 혹은 "소득"으로 번역한다. 그러나 그 단순하고 실제적인 의미에서 벗어날 이유가 없다. 제단의 양식이 하나님의 경멸받는 음식이라는 것이다. 즉, 제단의 양식으로서 인정되는 것이 어떤 종류의 고기든 좋다는 말이 제사장들뿐 아니라 백성의 입에도 자주 있었다는 것이다. "너무 엄격하게 고르려 하지 말고, 기름지지 않고 병든 것도 드려도 된다. 하나님은 마른 것과 병든 것으로도 만족하신다."
하나님이 제물들을 자신의 음식이나 고기라고 부르시는 이유를 이제 충분히 이해했다. 이것만을 관찰해야 한다 — 백성의 불경건이 명백했다는 것이다. 외적 가르침과 성례들을 오늘날 아무것도 아닌 것으로 여기는 사람이 있다면, 그가 하나님을 불경스럽게 경멸하는 자임을 증명하는 것이 아니겠는가?
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-12-12(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
13절 카드 ↗
He pursues the same subject — that the worship of God was despised by them and regarded as almost worthless. We must bear in mind what I have before stated — that the Jews are not reprehended here as though they had openly and avowedly spoken reproachfully of God’s worship; but that this was sufficiently evident from their conduct; for they allowed themselves so much licentiousness, that it was quite manifest that they were trifling with God, inasmuch as they had cast off every fear of him and all reverence towards him. Ye have said, Behold, labor . This may apply to the whole people, or to the priests alone. It is commonly explained of the priests — that they complained that they had a hard office, because they were continually in the temple and constantly watched there, and were much occupied in cleaning the vessels. The monks at this day under the Papacy, and the priests, boasting of themselves, say, “While all others sleep, we are watching; for we are constant in prayers.” Forsooth! they howl at midnight in their temples; and then by massing and by doing other strange things they imagine that they are seriously engaged in pacifying God. In this sense do some understand this passage, as though the priests, in order to commend their work, alleged that they labored much in God’s service, and as though God had enjoined on them many and difficult things. But I prefer applying this to the whole people, and yet I do not exclude the priests; for the Prophet here condemns both, and shows that it was wearisome to them to spend labor in worshipping God, that they considered it weariness, as we commonly say, Tu le fais par courvee . (211) And the import of what follows is the same, Ye have snuffed at it , that is, through disdain. Some give this rendering, “With sorrow have ye moved him;” and the verb is in Hiphil, and is often taken in this sense. The verb, נפח , nephech , is properly to snuff; and it is here in another conjugation; but even in Hiphil it has this meaning, and cannot be taken otherwise. Now they who render it, to move or touch with sorrow, are under the necessity of turning the words of the Prophet to a sense the most foreign and remote, even that the priests, extremely greedy of gain, compelled the common people to bring sacrifices, and thus extorted sacrifices, but not without sorrow and lamentation. We see how forced this is: I therefore wholly reject it. Some have hammered out a very refined sense, which is by no means suitable, “Ye have snuffed at it,” that is, Ye have said indeed that the victims are good and sufficiently fat; and yet ye may by breath blow them into the air. Others render it, to cast down, because they threw the sacrifices on the ground. But what need there is of departing from the common meaning of the word, since it is easy to conclude that both the priests and the people are here condemned, because the worship of God was a weariness to them, as we snuff at a thing when it displeases us. The behavior then of the fastidious is what the Prophet meant here to express. The passage will thus be very appropriate, Ye have said, Behold weariness! Ye have snuffed at it : then he adds, — Ye have offered the torn, and the lame, and the weak . These words prove the same thing — that they performed their duty towards God in a trifling manner by offering improper victims: when they had anything defective or diseased, they said that it was sacred to God, as we find it stated in the next verse. Some improperly render, גזול , gazul , a prey, what had been unjustly procured, as though he had said, that they offered victims obtained by plunder: but I wonder how they could thus distort the words of the Prophet without any pretense. He mentions here three kinds — the torn, the lame, and the maimed or the feeble. Who then does not see that the torn was an animal which had been torn by wild beasts? When therefore they had an animal half dead, having been torn by wolves, they thought that they had a suitable victim: “I am constrained to offer a sacrifice to God, this lamb is very suitable, for the wolf has devoured a part of it, and it has hardly escaped: as then it is maimed, I will bring it.” The Prophet then calls those torn victims which had been lacerated by the teeth of wild beasts. We now understand the import of the words; but we must remember what I have said — that God required not the performance of external rites, because he had need of meat and drink, or because he set a great value on these sacrifices, but on account of their design. The sacrifices then which God demanded from his ancient people had in themselves nothing that promoted true religion; nor could the odour of sacrifices of itself delight God; but the end was to be regarded. As then God ordered and commanded sacrifices to be offered to him, that he might exercise his people in penitence and faith, it was for this reason that he valued them. But when the people had fallen into gross contempt of them, that they brought to God, as it were to insult him, the maimed and the lame, their extremely base and intolerable impiety, as I have already said, was made fully evident. This is the reason why the Prophet now so vehemently chides the priests and the whole people; they offered to God such sacrifices as man would have rejected, according to what we noticed yesterday. It then follows — (211) Variety of meanings has been given to the word מתלאה Calvin takes it as one word with two letters added to לאה , to be weary or tired. But Drusius , Marckius , Parkhurst , Henderson , and others, regard it as a contraction for מה and תלאה , according to some other instances in Hebrew, and render it “What weariness!” and this corresponds with the context more than any other view. The Septuagint and the Targum considered the מ as a preposition, and this mistake has been followed by Jerome and the fathers, and also by Grotius and Newcome . “Behold, from weariness,” or from labor, or from affliction: and it has been regarded
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
그분은 같은 주제를 계속하신다 — 그들이 하나님의 예배를 경멸하고 거의 무가치한 것으로 여겼다는 것이다. 유대인들이 여기서 공개적으로 하나님의 예배에 대해 비난하는 말을 했다는 것이 아님을 기억해야 한다. 그들이 하나님에 대한 모든 두려움과 공경을 버리고 하나님과 장난하고 있음이 그들의 행실에서 충분히 분명했다.
"너희는 말하기를 이것이 얼마나 번거로운 고." 이것이 전 백성에 적용될 수도 있고, 제사장들만에게 적용될 수도 있다. 제사장들이 성전에 항상 있어야 하고 그곳을 계속 지키며 기물들을 청소하는 데 많이 종사했으므로, 교황주의 아래 수도사들과 제사장들이 오늘날 그들 자신에 대해 자랑하는 것처럼, 그들이 힘든 직무에 불평했다는 의미로 일반적으로 해석된다.
그러나 이것을 전 백성에게 적용하는 것이 더 낫다고 나는 생각한다. 제사장들도 제외하지 않으면서도. 선지자는 여기서 그들이 하나님을 예배하는 데 수고를 들이는 것을 귀찮게 여기고, 우리가 일반적으로 말하듯이 억지로 한다고 책망한다. "너희가 그것을 코웃음 쳤다." 즉, 경멸로. 어떤 이들은 "슬픔으로 그를 감동하다"로 번역하는데, 이는 매우 억지스럽다. 그 동사의 일반적인 의미에서 벗어날 이유가 없다. 코웃음 친다는 것은 어떤 것이 불쾌할 때 코를 찡그리는 것이다. 까다로운 사람들의 행동이 바로 선지자가 여기서 표현하고자 했던 것이다.
구절이 이렇게 될 것이다 — "너희는 말하기를 번거롭다! 너희가 그것을 코웃음 쳤다." 그는 덧붙이신다. "너희가 강탈한 것과 저는 것과 병든 것을 가져왔다." 이 말들은 같은 것을 증명한다 — 그들이 불합당한 희생제물을 드림으로써 하나님께 대한 의무를 경솔하게 수행했다는 것이다. 결점 있고 병든 것이 있을 때, 하나님께 거룩한 것이라고 말했다. "강탈한 것"을 어떤 이들은 불의하게 얻은 것, 즉 약탈로 얻은 것을 드렸다고 해석한다. 그러나 선지자의 말들을 이렇게 아무런 근거 없이 왜곡할 수 있었는지 이상하다. 그는 여기서 세 종류를 언급한다 — 강탈된 것, 저는 것, 병든 것. 강탈된 것이 야생 동물에게 찢긴 동물이라는 것을 누가 보지 못하겠는가? 이리에게 반쯤 죽어 찢긴 동물을 가졌을 때, 그들은 합당한 희생제물이 있다고 생각했다. "하나님께 제물을 드려야 하는데, 이 양이 매우 적합하다. 이리가 그것의 일부를 삼켰고 겨우 살아났기 때문이다. 이것이 병든 것이므로 그것을 가져오겠다." 선지자는 그러므로 야수의 이빨에 찢긴 희생제물을 강탈된 것이라 부른다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-13-13(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역
14절 카드 ↗
I come now to the kind of fraud they practiced, If there be, he says, in his flock a male, that is, a lamb or a ram, when he vows, then what is corrupt he offers to Jehovah . He then means, that though they pretended some religion, yet nothing was done by them with a sincere and honest heart; for they immediately repented of the vow made to God; they thought that they might be reduced to poverty, if they were too bountiful in their sacrifices. Hence then the Prophet proves that they offered to God with a double mind, and that whatever they thus offered was polluted, because it did not proceed from a right motive. We said yesterday, that the Prophet did not require fat or lean beasts, because God valued either the blood or flesh of animals on its own account, but for the end in view; for these were the performances of religion by which God designed to train up the Jews for the end contemplated, and in the duty of repentance. As then they were so sordid as to these sacrifices, it was easy to conclude, that they were gross and profane despisers of God, and had no concern for religion. The reason follows, For a great king am I, saith Jehovah, and my name is terrible (212) among the nations . God declares here that his majesty was of no account among the Jews, as though he had said, “With whom do you think that you have to do?” And this is what we ought carefully to consider when engaged in God’s service. We indeed know that it is a vice which has prevailed in all ages, that all nations and individuals thought that they worshipped God, when they devised foolish and frivolous rites according to their own fancies. If then we have a desire to worship God aright, we must remember how great he is; for his majesty will raise us up above the whole world, and cease will that audacity which possesses almost all mankind; for they think that their own will is a law, when they presumptuously obtrude anything on God. The greatness of God then ought to humble us, that we may not worship him according to the perceptions of our flesh, but offer him only what is worthy of his celestial glory. He again repeats what we have before observed, though it was disregarded by the Jews, — that he was a great king through the whole world. As then the Jews thought that sacrifices could not be offered to God, such as he would accept, in any other place but at Jerusalem, and in the temple on Mount Sion, he testifies that he is a great king even in the farthest parts of the world. It hence follows, that God’s worship would not be confined to Judea, or to any other particular part of the world; for by the gospel the Lord would receive to himself all nations, and come into the possession of his kingdom. Now follows (212) Rendered “illustrious — επιφανὲς ,” by the Septuagint , — “powerful,” by the Targum , — “dreadful — horrible,” by Jerome , — “terrible — terrible,” by Marckius , — “shall be feared,” by Henderson , — “shall be had in reverence,” by Newcome , and the same with Drusius , “ reverendum .” The word is literally “to be feared,” נורא ; it is often rendered “terrible,” what causes dread or terror. Some take the present tense, “my name is terrible,” i.e. , is dreaded on account of my greatness, manifested by my judgments. But if we take the future, then we must render the words — “my name shall be feared” or reverenced. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' Zechariah Zec 14 Malachi Mal Malachi Mal 2 Footnotes: Copyright Statement These files are public domain. Bibliographical Information Calvin, John. "Commentary on Malachi 1". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/ commentaries/ eng/ cal/ malachi-1.html. 1840-57. terms of use • privacy policy • • rights and permissions • contact sl • about sl • link to sl To report dead links, typos, or html errors or suggestions about making these resources more useful use the convenient contact form StudyLight.org © 2001-2026 Powered by Light speed Technology Ads Free Profile .sub-menu{font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;max-width:1260px;width:100%;background-color:#f7f7f7;color:#6b6b6b;border-bottom:5px solid #6b6b6b;display:flex;flex-direction:column;flex-wrap:nowrap;position:absolute;z-index:9998} .sub-menu .menu-group{width:100%;margin:0 5px 0;padding:0 5px 0;border-right:1px solid #6b6b6b} .sub-menu .menu-group-spacer{display:none} .sub-menu .menu-name{font-size:15px;font-weight:bold;color:#deac27} .sub-menu .menu-name a{color:#deac27} .sub-menu .menu-ul li a{color:#6b6b6b;} .sub-menu .menu-ul li:hover{color:#DD8000} .search-button{background-color:#6b6b6b;color:#fff;border:1px solid #6b6b6b;-webkit-appearance:square-button;padding:0 5px;font-size:13px} .int-search-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;margin-top:10px;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%} .int-search-div .int-s-query{border:1px solid #dadada;font-size:13px;padding:0 5px 0;margin-right:5px;width:30%;height:30px;flex:1 1 100%} .int-search-div .int-s-button{width:50px;margin-right:10px;height:30px;flex:0 0 50px} .int-selections-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%;margin-bottom:20px} .int-selections-div .int-s-section{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;font-size:13px;margin:5px 5px 0 0;width:70px;height:30px;flex:1 1 50%} .int-selections-div .int-s-translation{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;font-size:13px;margin-top:5px;padding:2px;width:40%;height:30px;flex:1 1 40%} .lex-search-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%} .lex-search-div .lex-s-query{border:1px solid #dadada;width:95%;height:30px;font-size:13px;padding:5px;margin-right:5px} .lex-search-div .lex-s-range{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;height:30px;font-size:13px;margin-right:5px;width:100px} .lex-search-languages{width:95%;font-size:11px;display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:nowrap;justify-content:flex-start;margin-top:5px} .ill-quo-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:wrap;width:100%;margin-top:10px} .ill-quo-s-query{font-size:15px;color:#6b6b6b;padding:0 10px 0;bord
Pericope (part_of)
- part_of
pericope/per-mal-1-003
절 (explains)
Source
source-manifest/cal— Calvin's Commentaries (PD)- evidence_grade: T_theological
내가 이제 그들이 행한 사기의 종류에 이른다. "그의 떼에 수컷이 있는데 그가 서원할 때 결점 있는 것을 여호와께 드리는 자." 그들이 어떤 종교적 외양을 꾸몄을지라도 아무것도 순수하고 정직한 마음으로 행하지 않았다는 것이다. 그들은 하나님께 서원한 것을 즉시 후회했다. 너무 많이 드리면 빈곤해질 것을 두려워했기 때문이다. 그러므로 선지자는 그들이 이중적인 마음으로 하나님께 드렸고, 이렇게 드린 모든 것이 더럽혀졌다고 증명한다. 옳은 동기에서 나오지 않았기 때문이다.
이유가 이어진다. "나는 큰 왕이라, 만군의 여호와가 말하노라. 내 이름은 열방 중에서 두려움을 받으리라." 하나님은 여기서 자신의 위엄이 유대인들에게 아무런 가치도 없었음을 선포하신다. 마치 그분이 이렇게 말씀하시는 것 같다. "너희가 누구와 상대하고 있다고 생각하느냐?" 하나님을 섬길 때 이것이 우리가 주의 깊게 고려해야 할 것이다. 우리는 모든 시대에 모든 민족과 개인들이 자신들의 공상에 따라 어리석고 사소한 의식들을 고안할 때 하나님을 예배한다고 생각했다는 것을 안다. 하나님을 바르게 예배하려는 소망이 있다면, 우리는 그분이 얼마나 위대하신지를 기억해야 한다. 그분의 위엄이 우리를 온 세상 위로 들어올릴 것이고, 거의 온 인류를 사로잡는 그 대담함도 그칠 것이다. 사람들은 하나님께 자신들의 뜻에 따라 임의의 것들을 강요할 때 자신들의 의지가 법이라고 생각하기 때문이다. 하나님의 위대하심이 그러므로 우리를 낮추어야 한다. 우리가 육신의 인식에 따라 그분을 예배하지 않고, 그분의 하늘의 영광에 합당한 것만을 드리도록 하기 위해서이다.
그는 이미 관찰한 것을 다시 반복하신다. 비록 유대인들이 무시했을지라도 — 그분이 온 세상을 통해 큰 왕이라는 것이다. 유대인들이 예루살렘과 시온 산 성전이 아닌 다른 곳에서는 하나님이 받으실 만한 제물이 드려질 수 없다고 생각했으므로, 그분은 세상의 가장 먼 곳에서도 큰 왕이라고 증거하신다. 그러므로 하나님의 예배가 유대나 어떤 특정한 세상의 일부에 국한되지 않을 것이 분명하다. 복음으로 주께서 모든 민족을 자신에게 받아들이시고 자신의 왕국의 소유에 들어오실 것이기 때문이다.
원주석
- 번역원본
commentary-section/cal-mal-1-14-14(Calvin, PD) - CC0-1.0 · Sonnet 번역