언어
챗봇 KG 근거 인용 · draft
주석[칼빈]말라기 › 2장

주석[칼빈] — 말라기 2장 · 제사장들의 타락

요약
칼빈 주석 · 섹션 17개 · 한국어 번역 있음(한국어 우선) · 본문 보기
아래 주석은 원문(및 번역문) 그대로입니다.

1절 카드 ↗

Though the priests did not sin alone, yet it is not without reason, as we have said, that they were regarded as the first in wickedness; for it was their office to correct what the people did amiss. Their dissimulation had the effect of encouraging the common people to sin: hence the Prophet accuses them especially as the authors of impiety; and this is what the words intimate, if they are rightly considered. To you , he says, O priests . They might have indeed exonerated themselves, or at least transferred a part of their guilt to others: “Oh! what can we do? for we see that the people are growing cold in God’s worship; it is better that imperfect sacrifices should be offered than none at all.” As then they might by evasion have somewhat extenuated their guilt, the Prophet the more sharply reproves them and says, To you especially is addressed this command , as they ought to have shown to others the right way; for when they dissembled, their connivance was nothing else but a consent; and thus they divested the people of God’s fear, and allowed them to corrupt the whole of religion by offering spurious sacrifices. To you then, he says, that is, “Though the whole people is guilty before God, think not that ye are on this account excused; for it behoves you to check this wickedness, for God has set you over the people as their teachers and guides: as then ye have neglected your duty, whatever others have done amiss, falls justly on your heads. For how has it happened that the people have dared to proceed so far in impiety? even because you have no concern for religion; for God has promoted you to the priesthood for this end — to preserve in integrity the worship of his name; but ye know of all the prevailing profanations, and ye hold your peace: To you then is this command . ” return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-2" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-1

Source

비록 제사장들만이 죄를 지은 것이 아니었지만, 우리가 말한 것처럼 그들이 악함에서 으뜸으로 여겨진 것은 이유가 없지 않다. 백성이 잘못 행하는 것을 바로잡는 것이 그들의 직무였기 때문이다. 그들의 묵인이 일반 백성으로 하여금 죄 짓도록 용기를 북돋아 준 결과가 되었다. 그러므로 선지자는 특히 그들을 불경건의 주모자들로 고발한다. 말씀들을 바르게 고려한다면 그것이 함축하는 것이다.

"제사장들아, 너희에게 고한다." 그들은 변명하거나 적어도 그들의 죄의 일부를 다른 이들에게 돌릴 수 있었다. "오! 우리가 어찌할 수 있겠는가? 백성이 하나님의 예배에서 식어가는 것을 보니, 아무것도 드리지 않는 것보다 불완전한 제물이라도 드리는 것이 낫다." 이처럼 그들이 회피로 죄를 어느 정도 축소할 수 있었으므로, 선지자는 더 날카롭게 책망한다. "너희에게 특히 이 명령이 해당한다." 그들이 다른 이들에게 바른 길을 보여주었어야 했기 때문이다. 그들이 묵인할 때, 그것은 동의와 다름없었다. 이렇게 그들은 백성에게서 하나님에 대한 두려움을 빼앗고, 불법적인 제물들을 드림으로써 온 종교를 부패시키도록 허용했다.

"너희에게 고한다." 즉, "비록 온 백성이 하나님 앞에 죄가 있을지라도, 그로 인해 너희가 면제된다고 생각하지 말라. 이 악함을 억제하는 것이 너희에게 합당하기 때문이다. 하나님이 너희를 그들의 교사요 안내자로 백성 위에 세우셨다. 너희가 의무를 소홀히 했으므로, 다른 이들이 어찌 잘못했든 그것이 당연히 너희 머리 위에 떨어진다. 백성이 어떻게 이토록 불경건 속에 대담하게 나아갈 수 있었겠는가? 바로 너희가 종교에 대한 관심이 없었기 때문이다. 하나님이 너희를 제사장직으로 높이신 것은 그분의 이름의 예배를 온전히 보존하기 위함이었다. 그러나 너희는 만연한 모든 모독들을 알면서도 침묵을 지켰다. 그러므로 이 명령이 너희에게 해당한다."

원주석

2절 카드 ↗

He then adds, If ye will not hear nor lay it to heart to give glory to my name , etc . He seems here to threaten the priests alone; and yet if any one carefully considers the whole passage, he will easily perceive that this address extends to the whole people, in such a way however that it is in the first place directed to the priests; for as I have said the greater portion of the guilt belonged to them. God then denounces a heavy punishment on the whole people as well as on the priests, even that he would send a curse . But that they might not object and say that they were too severely dealt with, God shows how justly he was displeased with them, because they hearkened not nor attended to his warnings. What indeed is less tolerable than not to hear God speaking? But as many thought it enough to stretch the ear, and then immediately to forget what had been spoken, it is added, If ye lay it not to heart , that is, If ye attend not and seriously apply your hearts to what is said. We see then that the Prophet shows how that God had a just cause for severely punishing them; for it was an impiety not to be borne, when he could obtain no hearing from men. But the Prophet shows at the same time what it is to hear God; he therefore adds the latter clause as a definition or an explanation of the former: for God is not heard, if we receive with levity his words, so that they soon vanish away; but we hear them when we lay them on the heart, or, as the Latins say, when we apply the mind to them. There is then required a serious attention, otherwise it will be the same as though the ears were closed against God. Let us further learn from this passage that obedience is of so much account with God, that he bears nothing less than a contempt of his word or a careless attention to it, as though we regarded not its authority. We must also notice that our guilt before God is increased and enhanced, when he recalls us to the right way, and seeks to promote our welfare by warning and exhorting us. When therefore God is thus kindly careful for our salvation, we are doubly inexcusable, if we perversely reject his teaching, warnings, counsels, and other remedies which he may apply. He now adds, I will send on you a curse ; and this curse he immediately explains, I will curse your blessings (213) The word blessing, we know, means everywhere in Scripture the beneficence or kindness of God. God then is said to bless us when he bountifully supports us and supplies whatever is necessary for us. And hence seems to have arisen the expression, that God by his nod alone can satisfy us with all abundance of good things. By blessings then he means a large and an abundant provision, and also rest from enemies, a healthy air, and everything of this kind. Some think that those prayers are intended, by which the priest blessed the people; but there is no reason for this. God then had manifested his favor to the Jews; he now declares that he will deprive them of all his benefits, that they might know that he is not propitious to them. Blessings then are evidences of God’s bounty and paternal favor. But he immediately adds, Yea, I have cursed . By which words he proves their senselessness: for they were not even taught by their evils, which yet produce some effect even on fools, who, according to the common proverb, begin to be wise when they are chastised. God then here reproves the stupidity of the Jews; for they had already been deprived of his benefits, and they might have known by experience that he was not propitious to them, but on the contrary an angry judge; and yet they were touched by no penitence, according to what we have seen in the other Prophets. We now understand the import of the words, and at the same time the object of the Prophet: I will then curse your blessings, and what is more , (so I explain, וגם , ugam ,) I have already cursed them: but ye are like blocks of wood or stones; for the very scourges avail nothing with you. He again repeats, because ye lay it not on your heart , in order to show that he could not bear the contempt of his word, for it was, as we have said, a sign of extreme impiety. It follows (213) It is “your blessing” in one MS., in the Septuagint , the Targum , and Arabic ; and this reading is confirmed by “it” in the next line. By “blessing,” says Newcome , “is meant the portion of the priests:” and as the priests are especially addressed, this is probable. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-3" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-2

Source

그는 덧붙인다. "만일 너희가 듣지 아니하며 마음에 두지 아니하여 내 이름에 영광을 돌리지 아니하면," 등. 그분은 여기서 제사장들만을 위협하시는 것처럼 보인다. 그러나 이 말씀 전체를 주의 깊게 고려한다면, 제사장들에게 일차적으로 향하면서도 전 백성에게 확장된다는 것을 알 수 있다. 내가 말한 것처럼 더 큰 죄의 몫이 그들에게 있었기 때문이다. 하나님은 제사장들과 마찬가지로 온 백성에게 무거운 형벌을 선포하신다. 심지어 저주를 보내실 것이라고.

그러나 그들이 너무 가혹하게 다루어진다고 이의를 제기하지 않도록, 하나님은 자신이 그들에게 불쾌하신 것이 얼마나 정당한지를 보이신다. 그들이 그분의 경고에 귀를 기울이지도, 주의하지도 않았기 때문이다. 하나님이 말씀하시는데 듣지 않는 것보다 더 참을 수 없는 것이 무엇이겠는가? 그러나 많은 이들이 귀를 기울이는 것으로 충분하다고 생각하고, 말해진 것을 즉시 잊어버렸으므로, "마음에 두지 아니하면"이 덧붙여진다. 즉, 주의를 기울이고 진지하게 마음을 말씀에 적용하지 않으면. 그러므로 선지자는 하나님이 그들을 심하게 벌하실 정당한 이유가 있음을 보인다. 사람들에게서 아무런 경청도 얻지 못하시는 것은 견딜 수 없는 불경건이기 때문이다.

선지자는 동시에 하나님을 듣는다는 것이 무엇인지도 보인다. 그의 말씀을 가볍게 받아들여 곧 사라지게 한다면 그분을 들은 것이 아니다. 우리가 그것을 마음에 둘 때, 혹은 라틴인들의 표현처럼 마음을 적용할 때 우리는 그분을 듣는 것이다. 그러므로 진지한 주의가 요구된다. 그렇지 않으면 하나님께 귀를 닫은 것과 같다.

이 구절에서 우리는 순종이 하나님께 이토록 귀중한 것이어서, 그분이 말씀에 대한 경멸이나 부주의한 주의를 가장 참기 어려워하신다는 것을 배운다. 하나님이 우리에게 경고하고 권면하심으로써 우리를 돌이키시고 우리의 복을 증진시키려 하실 때, 우리의 죄가 더욱 가중되고 심해진다는 것도 주목해야 한다. 하나님이 이처럼 친절하게 우리의 구원을 위해 관심을 가지실 때, 우리가 완고하게 그분의 가르침·경고·권면 및 그분이 적용하실 수 있는 다른 치유책들을 거부한다면 우리는 두 배로 변명할 수 없다.

그분은 덧붙이신다. "내가 너희에게 저주를 보내리라." 이 저주를 그분은 즉시 설명하신다. "너희의 복을 저주하리라." 복이라는 말은 성경 어디서나 하나님의 은혜로움 혹은 친절함을 의미함을 우리는 안다. 하나님이 우리를 풍성하게 지원하시고 우리에게 필요한 모든 것을 공급하실 때 우리를 복 주신다고 한다. 복들로써 그분은 크고 풍성한 양식과 원수들로부터의 안전, 좋은 공기, 그와 같은 모든 것을 의미한다. 어떤 이들은 제사장이 백성을 축복하던 기도들을 의미한다고 생각한다. 그러나 이는 이유가 없다. 하나님은 자신의 은혜로움과 부성적 은혜의 증거들인 유대인들에게 베푸신 자신의 유익들을 이제 그들에게서 빼앗겠다고 선포하신다.

그는 즉시 덧붙이신다. "내가 이미 저주하였노라." 이 말로써 그분은 그들의 우매함을 책망하신다. 심지어 악들로도 그들이 교훈을 얻지 못했기 때문이다. 악들은 어리석은 자들에게도 어느 정도 영향을 미치는 것이 보통이다. 속담처럼 그들이 징계받을 때 지혜롭기 시작하기 때문이다. 하나님은 여기서 유대인들의 우둔함을 책망하신다. 그들이 이미 그분의 유익들을 박탈당했고, 그분이 그들에게 은혜로우시지 않고 진노하시는 심판자이심을 경험으로 알 수 있었다. 그러나 다른 선지자들에서 보았던 것처럼, 그들은 아무런 회개도 없었다.

그분이 다시 반복하신다. "너희가 마음에 두지 아니함으로." 그분이 자신의 말씀을 경멸하는 것을 견딜 수 없다는 것을 보이기 위해서이다. 이미 말한 것처럼 그것은 극도의 불경건의 표였기 때문이다.

원주석

3절 카드 ↗

He confirms here again what he had said in the last verse, — that they would perceive God’s curse in want and poverty. The curse of God is any kind of calamity; for as God declares especially his favor by a liberal support, so the sterility of the land and defective produce most clearly evidence the curse of God. The Prophet then shows, by mentioning one thing, what sort of curse was nigh the Jews, — that God would destroy their seed . Some read, but improperly, “I will destroy you and the seed.” I wonder how learned men make such puerile mistakes, when there is nothing ambiguous in the Prophet’s words. I will destroy then for you the seed ; that is, “Sow as much as you please, I will yet destroy your seed, so that it shall produce no fruit.” In short, he threatens the Jews with want and famine; for the land would produce nothing when cursed by God. (214) But as the Jews flattered themselves on account of their descent, and ever boasted of their fathers, and as that preeminence with which God had favored them proved to them an occasion of haughtiness and pride, the Prophet here ridicules this foolish confidence, I will scatter dung , he says, on your faces : “Ye are a holy nation, ye are the chosen seed of Abraham, ye are a royal priesthood; these are your boastings; but the Lord will render your faces filthy with dung; this will be your nobility and preeminence! there is then no reason for you to think yourselves exempt from punishments because God has adopted you; for as ye have abused his benefits and profaned his name, so ye shall also find in your turn, that he will cover you with everything disgraceful and ignominious, so as to make you wholly filthy: ye shall then be covered all over with dung, and shall not be the holy seed of Abraham.” But as they might have again raised a clamor and say, “Have we then in vain so diligently served God? Why has he bidden a temple to be built for him by us and promised to dwell there? God then has deceived us, or at least his promises avail nothing.” — The Prophet gives this answer, “God will overwhelm you with disgrace and also your sacrifices.” But he calls them the dung of solemnities , as though he had said, “I will cover you with reproach on account of your impiety, which is seen in your sacrifices.” Had the Jews any holiness they derived it from their sacrifices, by which they expiated their sins and reconciled themselves to God: but the Prophet says that it was their special ill-savor which offended God, and which he abominated, because they vitiated their sacrifices. Nor is that to be disapproved which some of the rabbins have said, that the Prophet alludes to the oxen, calves, and rams; for when the Jews from various places brought their sacrifices, there must have been much dung from all that vast number. There is then here a striking allusion to the victims themselves, as though he had said, “Ye think that I can be pacified by your sacrifices, as though loads of dung were pleasing to me; for when ye bring such a vast number, even the place itself, the area before the temple, throws an ill-savor on account of the dung that is there. Ye are then, forsooth! holy, and all your filth is cleansed away by means of this dung. Begone then together with the dung of your solemnities; for I will cast this very dung on your heads.” We now perceive what the Prophet means: and emphatical are the words, Behold I ; for God by these single words cuts off all those pretences by which the Jews deceived themselves, and thought that their vices were concealed from God: “I myself,” he says, “am present, to whom ye think your sacrifices to be acceptable; I then will destroy your seed, and I will also cast dung on your faces ; all the dignity which ye pretend shall be abolished, for ye think that ye are defended by a sort of privilege, when ye boast yourselves to be the seed of Abraham: it is dung, it is dung,” he says. He afterwards shows what was especially the dung and the filth: for when they objected and said, “What! have our sacrifices availed nothing?” he answers, “Nay, I will cast that dung upon you, because the chief pollution is in your sacrifices, for ye vitiate and adulterate my service: and what else is your sacrifice but profanation only? ye are sacrilegious in all your empty pomps. Since then all your victims have an ill-savor and displease me, and as I nauseate them, (as it is also said in the first and last chapter of Isaiah,) I will heap the dung on your own heads, because ye think it to be your chief expiation.” He adds at last, It shall take you to itself ; that is, “Ye shall be dung altogether; and thus all your boastings, that ye are descended from the holy Patriarch Abraham, shall be wholly useless; though I made a covenant and promised that you should be to me a royal priesthood, yet the dung shall take you to itself , and thus whatever dignity I have hitherto conferred on you shall be taken away.” (215) Let us proceed (214) The word זרע , means “the shoulder” as well as “seed,” and it is so rendered by the Septuagint , and the Arabic , and also by Grotius and Newcome , — Behold, I will withhold from you the shoulder. The shoulder belonged to the priests, see Leviticus 7:32 ; Deuteronomy 18:3 . This rendering suits the context better than the other. — Ed. (215) Participles and vers are often connected by “and” in Hebrew, and so in Welsh; but then the auxiliary is understood. Such is the case here, and the Septuagint have so regarded it, “ καὶ λήψομαι ὑμας εἰς το ὰυ᾿τό — and I will take you to the same.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-4" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-3

Source

그분은 지난 절에서 하신 말씀을 다시 확인하신다 — 그들이 하나님의 저주를 결핍과 빈곤 속에서 인식할 것이라는 것이다. 하나님의 저주는 어떤 종류의 재앙이든 모두이다. 하나님이 특히 풍성한 공급으로 자신의 은혜를 나타내시는 것처럼, 땅의 불모와 결핍한 소출도 하나님의 저주를 가장 분명하게 증거한다.

선지자는 한 가지를 언급함으로써 유대인들에게 어떤 종류의 저주가 임박했는지를 보인다 — 하나님이 그들의 씨를 멸하실 것이라고. 그러므로 그분은 유대인들에게 결핍과 기근을 위협하신다. 하나님의 저주를 받으면 땅이 아무것도 산출하지 않을 것이기 때문이다.

그러나 유대인들이 자신들의 혈통을 자랑하고 항상 아버지들에 대해 자랑하며, 하나님이 그들에게 베푸신 그 탁월함이 오만과 교만의 빌미가 되었으므로, 선지자는 이 어리석은 자신감을 비웃는다. "내가 너희 얼굴에 분을 뿌리리라. 너희는 거룩한 민족이요, 아브라함의 선택된 씨요, 왕 같은 제사장이라고 자랑한다. 그러나 주께서 너희 얼굴을 분으로 더럽히실 것이다. 이것이 너희의 귀함과 탁월함이 될 것이다! 그러므로 너희가 하나님이 너희를 입양하셨다고 형벌에서 면제된다고 생각할 이유가 없다. 너희가 그분의 유익들을 남용하고 그분의 이름을 더럽혔으므로, 너희 차례에 그분이 너희를 온갖 치욕스럽고 수치스러운 것들로 덮으셔서 너희를 완전히 더럽게 하실 것임도 알게 될 것이다."

그들이 다시 이의를 제기하고 "그러면 우리가 하나님을 그토록 부지런히 섬긴 것이 헛된 것인가?"라고 말할 수도 있었으므로, 선지자는 이렇게 답한다. "하나님이 너희와 너희 제물들을 수치로 압도하실 것이다." 그러나 그는 그것들을 "명절의 분"이라 부른다. 마치 그가 말하는 것 같다. "내가 너희의 제물들에서 보이는 너희의 불경건으로 인해 너희를 책망으로 덮을 것이다." 유대인들이 어떤 거룩함을 가졌다면, 죄를 속죄하고 하나님과 화해시키는 제물들에서 얻었다. 그러나 선지자는 그것들이 제물들을 더럽혔으므로 하나님을 크게 불쾌하게 하고 그분이 혐오하는 특별한 악취였다고 말한다.

랍비들 중 일부가 선지자가 소와 송아지와 숫양들에 대해 암시한다고 말한 것도 나쁘지 않다. 유대인들이 여러 곳에서 그 방대한 수의 제물들을 가져올 때, 그 모든 것에서 많은 분이 나왔음에 틀림없기 때문이다. 희생제물들 자체에 대한 강렬한 암시가 있다. 마치 그가 말하는 것 같다. "너희는 내가 너희 제물들로 달래질 수 있다고 생각한다. 마치 분의 짐들이 내게 기쁜 것처럼. 너희가 그 방대한 수를 가져올 때, 그곳 자체, 성전 앞 뜰도 그 분으로 인해 악취를 풍긴다. 그러므로 너희는 거룩하고 너희의 모든 더러움이 이 분으로 씻겨진다! 그러면 너희 명절의 분과 함께 사라지라. 내가 이 분 자체를 너희 머리에 던질 것이다."

"보라, 나는" — 이 말로 하나님은 유대인들이 자신들을 속이고 그들의 악함이 하나님에게서 숨겨져 있다고 생각하게 한 모든 핑계들을 단번에 끊으신다.

원주석

4절 카드 ↗

Here he addresses in particular the priests; for though the whole people with great haughtiness resisted God, yet the priests surpassed them. And we know how ready men are to turn to evil whatever benefits God may bestow on them. It has been then a common evil in men from the beginning of the world, to exalt themselves and to raise their crests against God, when they found themselves adorned with his benefits: but we know that the more any one is bound to God the more thankful he ought to be, for our gifts are not our own, but the benefits by which God binds us to himself. “What best thou as thine own?” says Paul, “thou best then no reason to glory.” ( 1 Corinthians 4:7 ) This evil however has ever prevailed among men — that they have defrauded God of his glory, and have turned to an occasion of pride the favors received from him. But it is an evil which is very commonly seen in all governors; for they who are raised to a high dignity, think no more that they are men, but take to themselves very great liberty when they find themselves so much exalted above others. Thus kings and those in authority seem to themselves to be above the common order of men, and presumptuously disregard all laws; they think that everything is lawful for them, as no one opposes their willfulness. The same thing is also to be seen in teachers. For when God favored the priests with the highest honor, they became blinded, as it will hereafter be seen, by that favor of God, that they thought themselves to be as it were semi-gods; and the same thing has taken place in the kingdom of Christ. For how have arisen so great impieties under the Papacy, except that pastors have exercised tyranny and not just government? For they have not regarded the purpose for which they have been called into their office, but as the name of pastor is in itself honorable, they have dared to raise themselves above the clouds, and to assume to themselves the authority of God himself. Hence it has been, that they have dared to bind consciences by their own laws, to change the whole truth, and to corrupt the whole worship of God: and hence also followed the scandalous sale of justice. How have these things happened? Because priests were counted as angels come down from heaven; and this same danger is ever to be feared by us. This then is the vice which the Prophet now refers to; and he shows that the priests had no reason to think that they could shake off the yoke, Ye shall know , he says, that to you belongs this command . We indeed see what they objected to Jeremiah, “The law shall not depart from the priests nor counsel and wisdom from the elders.” ( Jeremiah 18:18 .) These are the weapons by which the Papists at this day defend themselves. When we allege against them plain proofs from Scripture, they find themselves clearly reproved and convicted by God’s word; but here is their Ajax’s shield, under which they hide all their wickedness, retailing as it were from the ungodly and wicked priests what is related by Jeremiah, “‘The law shall not depart from the priests;’ we are the Church, can it err? is not the Holy Spirit dwelling in the midst of us? ‘I am with you always to the end of the world,’ ( Matthew 28:20 ;) did Christ intend to deceive his Church when he said this to his Apostles? and we are their successors.” The Prophet now gives the answer, Ye shall know , he says, that to you, belongs this cornmand And he adds, not without severity, that my covenant may be with Levi ; (216) as though he had said, “On what account are ye thus elated? for God cannot get a hearing for himself, yet ye say that the covenant with Levi is not to be void, as though God had put Levi in his own place, and divested himself of all authority when he appointed that tribe, and made you ministers of the temple and teachers of the people; is he nothing? What was God’s purpose when he honored you with that dignity? He certainly did not mean to reduce himself to nothing, but, on the contrary, his will was, that his own right should remain entire and complete. When therefore I reprove your vices, and show that ye are become vile, and as it were dung, that ye are defiled by everything disgraceful, — when I make these things openly known, I do not violate the covenant made with Levi. God then justly summons you before his tribunal, and strips you of your honor, in order that the covenant he made with Levi may be confirmed and ratified.” This is, as I have said, a severe derision. But we may hence learn a useful truth. The Prophet briefly teaches us that the priestly office takes away nothing from God’s authority, who requires a pure and holy worship, and that it lessens in nothing the authority of the law, for sound doctrine ought ever to prevail. So at this day, when we resist the Papal priests, we do not violate God’s covenant, that is, it is no departure from the order of the Church, which ought ever to remain sacred and inviolable. We do not then on account of men’s vices, subvert the pastoral office, and the preaching of the word; but we assail the men themselves, so that due order may be restored, that sound doctrine may obtain a hearing among men, that the worship of God may be pure, which these unprincipled men have violated. We therefore boldly attempt to subvert the whole of the Papacy, with this full confidence, that we lessen nothing from the authority of teaching, nor in any way defraud the pastoral office; nay, order in the Church, the preaching of the truth, and the very dignity of pastors, cannot exist, except the Church be purged from its defilements, and its filth removed. Thus must we say also of those unprincipled men, who are too nearly connected with us, or too near us, and I wish they were wholly extinct in the world: but how many pests conceal themselves under this covering, or under this mask — “What! are we not the ministers of the word?” So say you who are without any principle; I wish ye were in your dung, or in your cells, where formerl

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-4

Source

여기서 그분은 특히 제사장들에게 말씀하신다. 비록 온 백성이 큰 오만함으로 하나님을 대적했지만, 제사장들이 그들을 능가했기 때문이다. 우리는 사람들이 하나님이 베푸시는 어떤 유익이든 악에 돌리는 것이 얼마나 쉬운지를 안다. 그러므로 하나님의 유익들로 장식될 때 스스로를 높이고 하나님을 대적하여 볏을 세우는 것이 세상 처음부터 사람들 가운데 공통적인 악이었다.

그러나 이것은 모든 통치자들에게서 매우 흔히 볼 수 있는 악이다. 높은 지위로 높여진 자들은 더 이상 자신들이 사람이라고 생각하지 않고, 자신들이 다른 이들보다 이토록 높여졌음을 발견할 때 매우 큰 자유를 취한다. 그래서 왕들과 권세자들은 자신들이 보통 사람들의 질서 위에 있다고 생각하여, 뻔뻔스럽게 모든 법들을 무시한다. 교사들도 마찬가지이다. 하나님이 제사장들을 최고의 영예로 은혜를 베푸셨을 때, 그들은 하나님의 그 은혜로 눈이 멀어 자신들이 마치 반신반인인 것처럼 생각하게 되었다. 교황권 아래서도 같은 일이 일어났다. 목회자들이 정당한 다스림이 아닌 전제 정치를 행사했기 때문이다. 그들이 자신들이 부름받은 목적을 고려하지 않고, 목사라는 이름이 그 자체로 영예로우므로, 구름 위로 자신들을 높이고 하나님 자신의 권위를 취하기를 감히 했다.

이것이 선지자가 지금 말하는 악이다. 그는 제사장들이 멍에를 벗어버릴 이유가 없다는 것을 보인다. "너희는 이 명령이 너희에게 해당함을 알리라." 우리는 그들이 예레미야에게 한 말을 안다. "율법은 제사장에게서 떠나지 아니할 것이요, 모략은 장로에게서." 이것들이 교황주의자들이 오늘날 자신들을 방어하는 무기들이다.

선지자는 이제 답한다. "너희는 알리라. 이 명령이 너희에게 해당함을." 그리고 심각함을 잃지 않으며 덧붙인다. "내 언약이 레위와 함께 있게 하기 위함이라." 마치 이렇게 말하는 것 같다. "너희가 이렇게 자부하는 이유가 무엇인가? 하나님은 스스로 들으실 수가 없으나, 너희는 레위와의 언약이 폐지되지 않아야 한다고 말한다. 마치 하나님이 레위를 자신의 자리에 두시고 그들을 성전의 종들과 백성의 교사들로 임명하실 때 모든 권위를 스스로 박탈하신 것처럼. 그분이 아무것도 아닌가? 하나님이 너희를 그 영예로 높이셨을 때 그분의 목적은 무엇이었는가? 그분은 확실히 스스로를 아무것도 아닌 것으로 낮추려 하시지 않았다. 오히려 그분의 뜻은 자신의 권리가 온전하고 완전하게 남는 것이었다. 내가 너희의 악함을 책망하고 너희가 비천해졌음을, 말하자면 분이 되었음을, 너희가 온갖 치욕스러운 것으로 더럽혀졌음을 보일 때 — 이것들을 공개적으로 알릴 때, 나는 레위와 맺은 언약을 위반하지 않는다. 그러므로 하나님이 정당하게 너희를 자신의 법정 앞으로 소환하시고 너희의 영예를 박탈하신다. 레위와 맺은 언약이 확증되고 비준되도록 하기 위해서이다."

이 유용한 진리를 우리는 배울 수 있다. 선지자는 제사장직이 하나님의 권위에서 아무것도 빼앗지 않는다는 것을 간략히 가르친다. 그분은 순수하고 거룩한 예배를 요구하시고, 율법의 권위를 조금도 줄이지 않으신다. 건전한 교훈이 항상 우선해야 하기 때문이다. 오늘날 우리가 교황의 제사장들을 대적할 때도, 우리는 하나님의 언약을 위반하지 않는다. 즉, 그것은 항상 거룩하고 불가침으로 남아야 할 교회의 질서에서 이탈하는 것이 아니다. 우리는 사람들의 악함으로 인해 목회 직분과 말씀 전파를 전복하는 것이 아니다. 우리는 사람들 자체를 공격하여, 건전한 교훈이 사람들 사이에서 경청을 얻고, 하나님의 예배가 순수하게 되도록, 정당한 질서가 회복되게 하는 것이다.

원주석

5절 카드 ↗

The Prophet now proves more clearly how God violates not his covenant, when he freely rebukes the priests, and exposes also their false attempts in absurdly applying to themselves the covenant of God, like the Papal priests at this day, who say that they are the Church. How? because they have in a regular order succeeded the apostles; but this is a foolish and ridiculous definition; for he who occupies the place of another ought not on that account only to be deemed a successor. Were a thief to kill the master of a family, and to occupy his place, and to take possession of all his goods, is he to be accounted his legitimate successor? So these dishonest men, to show that they are to be regarded as apostles, only allege a continued course of succession; but the likeness between them ought rather to be the subject of inquiry. We must see first whether they have been called, and then whether they answer to their calling; neither of which can they prove. Then their definition is altogether frivolous. So also our Prophet here shows, that the priests made pretences and deceived the common people, while they sought to prove themselves heirs of the covenant which God had made with Levi their father, that is, with the tribe itself. “I shall be faithful,” says God, “and my faithfulness will be evident from the compact itself; my compact with your father was that of life and peace : (217) but it was mutual: ye seem not to think that there are two parties in a compact, and that there is, according to what is commonly said, a reciprocal obligation: but I on my part promised to your father to be his father, and I also stipulated with him that he was to obey me, to obey my word, and whatever I might afterwards require. Now ye will have me to be bound to you, and yourselves to be free from every obligation. What equity is this — that I should owe everything to you and you nothing to me? My compact then with him was that of life and peace ; but what is your compact? what is it that ye owe to me? Even what the mutual compact which I made with your father Levi and his tribe requires; perform this, and ye shall find that I am faithful and constant in all my promises.” I cannot go farther now. (217) That we may understand these terms we must have recourse to the case evidently alluded to, that of Phinehas, in Numbers 25:12 . God promised to him the covenant of peace and of perpetual priesthood—of peace, that is, of reconcilement, because God through the zeal displayed by Phinehas became reconciled to the children of Israel — and of perpetuity as to the priesthood, signified here by life or “lives,” as the word is plural. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-6" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-5

Source

선지자는 이제 하나님이 제사장들을 자유로이 책망하실 때 어떻게 자신의 언약을 위반하지 않으시는지를 더 분명하게 증명한다. 그리고 오늘날의 교황 제사장들처럼 하나님의 언약을 자신들에게 부당하게 적용하려는 그들의 거짓된 시도를 드러낸다.

하나님은 말씀하신다. "나는 신실할 것이며, 내 신실함은 약정 자체에서 분명할 것이다. 너희 아버지 곧 지파 자체와의 나의 약정은 생명과 평화의 것이었다. 그러나 그것은 상호적이었다. 너희는 약정에 두 당사자가 있고, 일반적으로 말하듯이 상호 의무가 있다는 것을 생각하지 않는 것 같다. 그러나 나는 내 편에서 너희 아버지에게 그의 아버지가 되겠다고 약속했고, 또한 그가 나에게 순종하고, 내 말씀에 순종하며, 내가 이후에 요구하는 무엇에든 순종해야 한다는 것도 약정했다. 이제 너희는 내가 너희에게 의무가 있고 너희는 모든 의무에서 자유롭기를 원한다. 이것이 무슨 공평함인가 — 내가 너희에게 모든 것을 빚지고 너희는 내게 아무것도 빚지지 않는다는 것이? 그러므로 그와의 나의 약정은 생명과 평화의 것이었다. 그러나 너희의 약정은 무엇인가? 내가 너희 아버지 레위와 그의 지파와 맺은 상호 약정이 요구하는 것이다. 이것을 이행하라, 그러면 내가 모든 내 약속에서 신실하고 불변함을 알게 될 것이다."

원주석

6절 카드 ↗

He explains mote fully how Levi responded to God’s command, — that he had the law of truth in his mouth . The chief duty of a priest is to show the right way of living to the people; for however upright and holy one may be through his whole life, he is not on that account to be deemed a priest. Hence our Prophet dwells especially on this point — that Levi taught the people. He does not speak of Levi himself; for we know that Levi was dead when Aaron was made a priest. For God does not here speak of individuals, but of the tribe; as though he had said, “Aaron and Eleazar, and those who followed them, knew for what end they were honored with the priesthood, and they faithfully performed their duties.” The Prophet now explains what God mainly requires from priests — to show to the people, as I have already said, the way of living a pious and holy life; but he adopts different words, which yet mean the same thing. The law of truth , he says, was in his mouth . Why does he not commend the integrity of his heart rather than his words? Had he spoken of an individual, the Prophet might have justly said, that he who sought to be an approved servant of God, had conducted himself harmless towards men; but he speaks of a public office, when he says, that the law of truth was in his mouth; for he is not worthy of that honor who is mute: and nothing is more preposterous, or even more ridiculous, than that those should be counted priests who are no teachers. These two things are, as they say, inseparable — the office of the priesthood and teaching. And that he might more clearly show that he speaks not of an ordinary matter, he repeats the same thing in other words, Iniquity was not found in his lips . We hence see that all this belongs peculiarly to the sacerdotal office. He afterwards adds, In peace and rectitude he walked before me . The Prophet here commends also the sincere concern for religion which the first priests manifested, for they walked with God in peace and uprightness; they not only carried signals in their lips and mouth, by which they might have been justly deemed the ministers of God and the pastors of his Church; but they also executed faithfully their office. And he alludes to the peace of which he had spoken: as God then had promised peace to the Levites, so also he says, that the Levites had lived themselves peaceably before God; for they did not break the covenant which he had made with them. As then they had responded to the stipulation of God, he says that they had walked in peace: but he also mentions how this was; it was, because they had walked in uprightness. And the phrase, אתי , ati , with me, ought to be observed; for it confirms what I have stated, — that the honor of the priesthood in no way lessens God’s authority, for he keeps the priests devoted to himself. He intimates then that they were not elevated to such a height, that their dignity took away anything from God’s authority: for the obligation, which has been mentioned, ought to be mutual: God is faithful; the priests also must be faithful in their office, and show themselves to be the legitimate ministers of God. (219) He also mentions the fruit of their doctrine; for Levi turned many from iniquity , that is, he led many to repentance. It afterwards follows (for this verse ought to be joined) — (219) “The fear of God,” says Cocceius , “which was in the first priests, is more fully declared by its effects, which are twofold—sayings and doings. The doctrine of truth was in their mouth; they taught the truth, they were not silent, but sincerely taught it, without admiring what was false; for what is false is injustice, and it is the truth set forth either in a perverted form, or by addition, or by diminution. As to doings, they walked in peace, they did not rebel against God, nor did they seek devious and crooked ways, but walked in a strait course.” The word עולה is rendered “unrighteousness, or, injustice — ἀδικία ,” by the Septuagint and the Targum , — “ falsitas , falseness,” by Drusius , — and “iniquity” by many. There being no agreement in gender between it and the verb “formed,” Marckius suggests that דבר is understood, “the word of iniquity,” etc. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-7" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-6

Source

레위가 어떻게 하나님의 명령에 응했는지를 더 충분히 설명한다 — 그의 입에 진리의 율법이 있었다는 것이다. 제사장의 주된 의무는 백성에게 올바른 생활 방식을 보이는 것이다. 비록 온 생애를 통해 아무리 정직하고 거룩할지라도, 그것만으로 제사장으로 여겨질 수 없다. 그러므로 선지자는 특히 이 점에 머문다 — 레위가 백성을 가르쳤다는 것이다.

그는 레위 자신에 대해 말하지 않는다. 아론이 제사장으로 만들어졌을 때 레위는 이미 죽었음을 우리는 안다. 하나님은 여기서 개인들에 대해 말씀하시지 않고, 지파에 대해 말씀하신다. 마치 이렇게 말씀하시는 것 같다. "아론과 엘르아살과 그들을 따른 자들은 어떤 목적으로 제사장직으로 영화롭게 되었는지 알았고, 신실하게 그들의 의무를 수행했다." 선지자는 이제 하나님이 제사장들에게 주로 요구하시는 것을 설명한다 — 이미 말한 것처럼 경건하고 거룩한 삶의 방식을 백성에게 보여주는 것이다. 그러나 그는 다른 말들을 사용하지만 같은 것을 의미한다.

"진리의 율법이 그의 입에 있었다." 왜 그는 말들보다 오히려 그의 마음의 온전함을 칭찬하지 않는가? 개인에 대해 말한다면, 선지자는 정당하게 이렇게 말할 수 있었다. 하나님의 승인받는 종이 되려는 자는 사람들에게 해가 없도록 자신을 처신했다고. 그러나 그는 공직에 대해 말하며, "그의 입에 진리의 율법이 있었다"고 말한다. 가르치는 자가 아닌 자는 그 영예를 받을 자격이 없기 때문이다. 제사장직과 가르치는 것은 불가분한 것이다. 같은 것을 더 분명히 보이기 위해 같은 것을 다른 말로 반복한다. "그의 입술에 불의가 없었다." 이것이 모두 특히 제사장직에 속한다는 것을 안다.

그는 덧붙인다. "그가 화평과 정직으로 나와 동행하며." 선지자는 여기서 또한 첫 제사장들이 나타낸 진심 어린 종교적 관심을 칭찬한다. 그들이 화평과 정직으로 하나님과 동행했기 때문이다. 그들은 자신들의 입과 입술에서만 신호를 내보내어 하나님의 종들과 그분의 교회의 목회자들로 정당하게 여겨졌을 뿐 아니라, 신실하게 직무를 수행했다. 그리고 그는 언급했던 평화를 암시한다. 하나님이 레위인들에게 평화를 약속하신 것처럼, 레위인들도 하나님 앞에서 평화로이 살았다고 말한다. 그들이 하나님이 그들과 맺으신 언약을 어기지 않았기 때문이다. 그들이 약정에 응했으므로, 화평으로 동행했다고 말한다.

"나와 함께"라는 어구가 주목되어야 한다. 이것이 내가 말한 것을 확인한다 — 제사장직의 영예가 하나님의 권위를 조금도 줄이지 않는다는 것이다. 그분이 제사장들을 자신에게 헌신하도록 유지하시기 때문이다. 그러므로 그분은 그들이 이토록 높여진 결과 그들의 위엄이 하나님의 권위에서 무언가를 빼앗을 만큼 높아진 것이 아님을 암시한다. 상호 의무가 유지되어야 하기 때문이다. 하나님은 신실하시다. 제사장들도 직무에서 신실해야 하고, 하나님의 합법적인 종들임을 보여야 한다.

그는 또한 그들의 교훈의 열매도 언급한다. "레위가 많은 사람들을 불의에서 돌이켰다." 즉, 많은 이들을 회개로 이끌었다. 그 다음이 이어진다.

원주석

7절 카드 ↗

What the Prophet has said of the first priests he extends now to the whole Levitical tribe, and shows that it was a perpetual and unchangeable law as to the priesthood. He had said that Levi had been set over the Church, not to apply to himself the honor due to God, but to stand in his own place as the minister of God, and the teacher of the chosen people. The same thing he now confirms, declaring it as a general truth that the lips of the priest ought to retain knowledge , as though he had said, that they were to be the store-house from which the food of the Church was to be drawn. God then did appoint the priests over his chosen people, that the people might seek their food from them as from a store-room, according to what we find to be the case with a master of a family, who has his store of wine and his store of provisions. As then the food of a whole family is usually drawn out from places where provisions are laid up, so the Prophet makes use of this similitude, — that God has deposited knowledge with the priests, so that the mouth of every priest might be a kind of store-house, so to speak, from which the people are to seek knowledge and the rule of a religious life: Keep knowledge then shall the lips of the priest, and the law shall they seek from his mouth (220) He shows how it is to be kept; the priests are not to withhold it, but the whole Church is to enjoy the knowledge of which they are the keepers. They shall then seek or demand the law from his mouth. Law may be taken simply for truth; but the Prophet no doubt alludes here to the doctrine of Moses, the only true fountain of all knowledge. We indeed know that God included in his law whatever was necessary for the welfare of his Church; nor was there anything added by the Prophets. Our Prophet then so includes every truth in the word, תורה , ture , law, that he might at the same time show that it was laid up in what Moses has taught. He says in the last place, that the priest is the messenger of Jehovah . He briefly defines here what the priesthood is, even an embassy which God commits to men, that they may be his interpreters in teaching and ruling the Church. What then is a priest? A messenger of God, and his interpreter. It hence follows that the office of teaching cannot be separated from the priesthood; for it is a monstrous thing when any one boasts himself to be a priest, when he is no teacher. The Prophet then draws an argument from the definition itself, when he says that a priest is a messenger of God. Then follows the contrast when he says (220) The verbs, as here rendered, are future: but being preceded by כי , many consider them as declaring what ought to be: and they are thus rendered by Drusius , Dathius , Newcome , and Henderson , “should keep,” or “ought to keep,” etc. We find the future thus used when preceded by ה , “whether,” in Ezekiel 34:2 ; and when preceded by no particle, as in Malachi 1:6 , where the version ought clearly to be, — A son should honor a father, And a servant, his Lord. This use of the future, as designating a duty or obligation, is much more frequent in Hebrew than what is commonly supposed. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-8" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-7

Source

선지자가 첫 제사장들에 대해 말한 것을 이제 레위 지파 전체로 확장하고, 그것이 제사장직에 관한 영속적이고 변하지 않는 법임을 보인다. 그는 레위가 교회 위에 세워진 것은 하나님께 합당한 영예를 자신에게 취하려는 것이 아니라, 하나님의 종이요 선택된 백성의 교사로서 자신의 자리에 서기 위한 것이었다고 말했다. 이제 같은 것을 확인하며, 일반적 진리로 선포한다. 제사장의 입술은 지식을 지켜야 한다고. 마치 그들이 교회가 식량을 공급받아야 할 창고가 되어야 한다고 말하는 것 같다.

하나님은 그러므로 선택된 백성 위에 제사장들을 임명하셨다. 백성이 한 가정의 주인이 포도주 창고와 양식 창고를 갖는 것처럼, 식료품실에서 음식을 끌어내듯이 그들에게서 음식을 찾을 수 있도록. 온 가정의 음식이 일반적으로 양식이 쌓인 곳에서 나오듯이, 선지자는 이 비유를 사용한다 — 하나님이 제사장들에게 지식을 예치하셨으므로, 모든 제사장의 입이 말하자면 창고가 되어 백성이 지식과 종교적 삶의 규칙을 찾을 수 있도록. "제사장의 입술은 지식을 지켜야 하고 사람들은 그의 입에서 율법을 구해야 한다."

그는 어떻게 지켜져야 하는지를 보인다. 제사장들이 그것을 감추어서는 안 되고, 온 교회가 그들이 보관하는 지식을 누려야 한다는 것이다. "그들은 그의 입에서 율법을 구할 것이다." 율법은 단순히 진리로 이해될 수 있다. 그러나 선지자는 의심할 바 없이 여기서 모세의 교훈을 암시한다. 모든 지식의 유일한 참된 샘이기 때문이다.

마지막으로 그는 제사장이 여호와의 사자라고 말한다. 그분은 여기서 간략하게 제사장직이 무엇인지를 정의한다 — 하나님이 사람들에게 맡기시는 사절, 그들이 교회를 가르치고 다스리는 일에서 그분의 해석자들이 되도록. 그러면 제사장은 무엇인가? 하나님의 사자요 해석자이다. 그러므로 가르치는 직분이 제사장직에서 분리될 수 없다는 것이 따라온다. 제사장임을 자랑하면서 교사가 아닌 것은 기괴한 일이기 때문이다. 선지자는 그러므로 정의 자체에서 논증을 이끌어낸다. 제사장은 하나님의 사자라고 그가 말할 때. 그 다음에 대조가 이어진다.

원주석

8절 카드 ↗

He shows here how far were the priests of his time from fulfilling that compact which he had mentioned. He hence concludes that they were unworthy of the honor of which they were so confidently proud, and under the shadow of which they sought to cover their vices, as though they were not bound to God, and were at liberty to tread the Church under foot with impunity. He then shows that it was an extremely foolish arrogance in them to seek to be exempt from all law, and yet to regard God and the whole Church bound to them. He says first, that they deviated from the way , that is, they exhibited nothing suitable to their office, on account of which they were counted priests. He then amplifies their guilt — that they made many to stumble in the law (221) He had before said that Levi walked in peace and uprightness; what he now says is very different — that the priests, forgetting religion, had first shaken off the yoke. He had said that Levi restored many from iniquity; but he now says that the priests made many to stumble. He adds in the last place — Ye have therefore corrupted the covenant . An illative is to be put here, for so ought the sentence to be explained — “As ye have deviated from the way, and perverted the whole worship of God, ye have thus violated the compact which had been sanctioned with Levi; ye have then no reason to boast of your title of honor, for succession failed when ye fell away from the faithfulness of your father Levi.” At length it follows — (221) “At the law” is our version, and that of Newcome , who adds, “By offering blemished sacrifices.” Henderson has “in the law.” They departed from the way prescribed in the law, and caused others to fall or stumble in it, that is, in the way which the law pointed out. The way, says Drusius , is the law itself. To stumble in the law is to transgress it. For “causing to stumble,” the Septuagint have “ye have weakened— ησθενήσατε ;” Sym . and Theodoret, “ye have caused to stumble — εσκανδαλίσατε ;” and so the Vulgate Dathius gives this paraphrase — “ye have caused many to sin against the law.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-9" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-8

Source

그분은 여기서 당시의 제사장들이 언급한 그 약정을 이행하는 것에서 얼마나 멀었는지를 보이신다. 그러므로 그들이 그것의 그림자 아래 자신들의 악함을 덮고 하나님과 온 교회가 처벌 없이 그들의 발 아래 밟혀야 한다고 자유로이 생각하면서 그토록 자신 있게 자랑하는 영예를 받을 자격이 없음을 결론짓는다. 그러므로 그분은 모든 법에서 면제되기를 구하면서도 하나님과 온 교회가 자신들에게 의무가 있다고 여기는 것이 그들에게 극도로 어리석은 오만임을 보이신다.

그분은 먼저 그들이 "길에서 떠났다"고 말씀하신다. 즉, 제사장들로 여겨진 것에 합당한 직무를 조금도 보이지 않는다는 것이다. 그런 다음 그들의 죄를 더욱 부각시키신다 — 그들이 "많은 사람들로 율법에서 걸려 넘어지게 했다"고. 그분은 레위가 화평과 정직으로 동행했다고 앞서 말씀하셨는데, 이제 하시는 말씀은 매우 다르다 — 종교를 잊은 제사장들이 먼저 멍에를 벗어버렸다는 것이다. 그분은 레위가 많은 이들을 불의에서 돌이켰다고 말씀하셨다. 그러나 이제는 제사장들이 많은 이들을 걸려 넘어지게 했다고 말씀하신다.

마지막으로 덧붙이신다. "너희가 언약을 부패하게 하였도다." 여기에 결론이 있다. "너희가 길에서 떠나고 하나님의 온 예배를 전도했으므로, 너희는 레위와 함께 비준된 약정을 위반했다. 그러므로 너희는 너희 영예의 직함에 대해 자랑할 이유가 없다. 아버지 레위의 신실함에서 너희가 떠날 때 계승이 끊겼기 때문이다."

원주석

9절 카드 ↗

The Prophet draws this conclusion — that the priests in vain gloried in the honor of their office, for they had ceased to be the priests of God. We may now return to the main point. We perceive what the subject is which the Prophet handles here: as the priests sought by a peculiar privilege to exempt themselves from all reproof, he assails them in particular; for teaching would have been useless as to the common people, except the priests themselves were brought to order. The priests no doubt flattered the people, and thus attempted to deprive the Prophets of every respect, in order that their doctrine might produce no effect. This is the reason why our Prophet so sharply reproves them. But we must consider the state of the case. The priests said that they had been set, by divine authority, over the whole Church, and that they could not be deprived of that honor which they had received from God. They however took only but one part of the covenant, and yet sought to deprive God of his right. The Prophet here answers them — that God had indeed favored them with no common honor in appointing them the priests of his Church, but that the compact, which included a mutual stipulation, was at the same time to be considered; for God had not simply appointed them the guides of his Church, but had also added a condition. We hence see that the hinge of the matter was, that the priests presumptuously and absurdly laid hold on what favored only their own cause, and at the same time passed by and cunningly overlooked the chief thing — that the priesthood was connected with the worship of God. Now had they attained what they wished, there would have been no God in the Church, but they would have exercised over it a tyrannical power. But it has ever been, and is still the will of God, to retain the supreme power over mortals in his own hand. Having now seen the design of the Prophet, we may easily perceive the import of the whole subject. But before we proceed farther, we must first observe, that we have here described to us the character of true and legitimate priests; for the Prophet not only speaks of the office of priests, but sets before us a living image in which we cannot be deceived: and hence all who are engaged in the pastoral office may know what God requires from them. I will only just mention what he first says — that God gave fear to priests; for I have already given a sufficient explanation of this by saying, that priests are not to abuse their right, as though the highest power were granted to them; for God will not have his Church subject to tyranny, but his will is to reign alone in it through the ministry of men. The main thing then to be borne in mind is this — that a rule is prescribed to priests, that though they preside and possess the first rank of honor among the people, it is yet under certain conditions. We shall now consider only this which the Prophet says — that Levi faithfully and sincerely performed his office, because the law of truth was in his mouth , and no iniquity was found in his lips ; to which we ought yet to add the general truth which immediately follows — that the priest’s lips ought to keep knowledge. It is then a law which cannot be abolished, that those who are priests or pastors in the Church are to be teachers. And not unwisely does Gregory apply a custom under the law to this subject; for we know that appended to the priest’s dress were bells; and it is distinctly commanded by Moses, that the priest should not go forth without this sound, ( Exodus 28:35 .) Gregory, as I have said, accommodated this to teaching — “Woe,” he says, “to us, if we go forth without sound, that is, if we boast that we are pastors, and in the meantime are dumb dogs; for nothing is less tolerable than that he who speaks not in the Church and whose voice is not clearly heard to the edification of the people, should be deemed a pastor.” This is what a Roman Pope has said. Let those who now proudly and confidently boast themselves to be his successors, at least give the sound, and let us hear what they teach: but as their whole power is exercised in cruelty, it is evident how faithfully they keep God’s covenant! But I now return to the words of the Prophet. He says, that this law has been fixed by God, and that it cannot be nullified by any decrees or customs of men, — that the priest is to keep knowledge in his lips. He farther explains himself by showing that the priest is to be the keeper of knowledge, not that he may reserve it for himself, but that he may teach the whole people: they shall seek , he says, the law from his mouth ; and afterwards he confines knowledge to true doctrine, as it was to flow from the law of God, the only true fountain of truth; for he had said, that the law of truth was in the mouth of Levi. It would not then be enough for one to have his mouth open and to be prepared to teach others, except purity of doctrine be retained. We hence see, that not only teaching is required from priests, but pure teaching, derived from the very mouth of God, according to what is said in Ezekiel 3:17 , “Thou shalt receive from my mouth the word, and shalt declare it to them from me.” God shows there that the Prophets had no such authority as that they could bring forth anything they pleased, or what they thought would be right, but that they were so far faithful teachers as they were his disciples alone: hence he bids him to seek the word from his mouth; and then he adds, “Thou shalt declare it to them from my mouth.” So also it is said in Jeremiah 23:28 , “What is the chaff to the wheat? The Prophet who has a dream, let him declare his dream; but he who has my word, let him declare my word faithfully.” Here God limits and defines the prophetic right, as though he had said, that the Prophets were not appointed, that they might bring anything indiscriminately, but that each, according to the measure of what was revealed to him, might faithfully dispense, or deliver, as it we

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-9

Source

선지자는 이 결론을 이끌어낸다 — 제사장들이 그들의 직무의 영예를 자랑하는 것이 헛되다. 그들이 하나님의 제사장이기를 그쳤기 때문이다.

우리는 이제 주요 사안으로 돌아갈 수 있다. 선지자가 여기서 다루는 주제를 알 수 있다. 제사장들이 특별한 특권으로 모든 책망에서 스스로를 면제하려 했으므로, 선지자는 특히 그들을 공격한다. 가르침이 일반 백성에게 쓸모가 없었을 것이기 때문이다. 제사장들 자신이 먼저 질서에 복종하게 되지 않는 한.

제사장들은 의심할 바 없이 백성에게 아첨하고, 선지자들에 대한 모든 존중을 박탈하여 그들의 교훈이 아무런 효과도 없도록 하려 했다. 이것이 선지자가 그들을 이렇게 날카롭게 책망하는 이유이다. 그러나 사안의 상태를 고려해야 한다.

제사장들은 자신들이 신적 권위로 온 교회 위에 세워졌고, 하나님에게서 받은 영예를 박탈당할 수 없다고 말했다. 그러나 그들은 언약의 한 부분만을 취하고, 하나님의 권리를 박탈하려 했다. 선지자는 여기서 그들에게 답한다 — 하나님이 진정으로 그들에게 교회의 제사장들로 임명함으로써 비범한 영예를 베푸셨지만, 상호 약정을 포함하는 그 약정도 동시에 고려되어야 한다는 것이다. 하나님이 단순히 그들을 교회의 안내자들로 임명하신 것이 아니라, 또한 조건도 덧붙이셨기 때문이다.

참되고 합법적인 제사장들의 성격이 여기서 우리에게 묘사되어 있음을 우리는 본다. 선지자는 제사장들의 직무에 대해서만 말하지 않고, 우리가 속을 수 없는 생생한 형상을 우리 앞에 제시하기 때문이다. 그러므로 목회 직분에 종사하는 모든 이들이 하나님이 그들에게 요구하시는 것이 무엇인지를 알 수 있다. 제사장의 입술이 지식을 지켜야 한다는 이 법은 폐지될 수 없다. 교회에서 제사장이나 목회자인 자들은 교사여야 한다. 그레고리가 율법 아래의 관습을 이 주제에 적용한 것은 지혜롭지 않지 않다. 우리는 제사장의 의복에 방울들이 달려 있었음을 안다. 이 소리 없이 제사장이 나가지 말 것을 모세가 분명히 명령했기 때문이다. 그레고리는 이것을 가르치는 것에 적용했다. "우리가 소리 없이 나간다면 우리에게 화가 있을 것이다. 즉, 우리가 목사임을 자랑하면서 그 사이에 벙어리 개들이라면." 이것이 한 로마 교황이 한 말이다. 자신들이 그의 계승자임을 자랑하는 자들이 이제 적어도 소리를 내어 그들이 가르치는 것을 들려주어야 할 것이다.

원주석

10절 카드 ↗

The Prophet accuses the Jews here of another crime — that they were perfidious towards God and their own brethren, and departed from that pre-eminence into which God had raised them, when they were chosen in preference to other nations to be a holy and peculiar people. This ingratitude the Prophet now condemns by saying, that they all had one father, and that they had been all created by one God The word Father may be applied to God as well as to Abraham, and some interpreters will have it repeated, which is no uncommon thing in Hebrew: they say then that all had God as their Father, because he created them all; so that the latter clause is taken as an explanation. But it is better, as I think, to apply the word to Abraham, and the passage requires this; for it follows at the end of the verse, that the covenant which the Lord had made with their fathers had been violated; and this will appear still more certain, when we bear in mind the design of the Prophet. (225) Presently a reproof follows, because they had taken many wives; but the Prophet seems not as yet to mention this vice, but speaks generally, that they did not preserve that purity to which they had been called, for they indiscriminately married heathen wives. As then they mingled without distinction with unbelievers and the despisers of God, the Prophet complains that they were unmindful of that dignity to which they had been elevated, when God deigned to adopt them as his holy people. For thus it happened, that the pre-eminence which Moses celebrates in Deuteronomy 4:8 , disappeared, “What nation is so renowned, to whom God draws nigh, as thou seest that he is nigh to thee?” When therefore the Jews rendered themselves vile, the Prophet condemns them for ingratitude. He, at the same time, shows that they were become inhuman towards their brethren, with whom they had been united by a most sacred bond. It then seems probable to me, that God and Abraham are mentioned here, because God had chosen the race of Abraham and adopted them as his people, and also, because he had deposited his covenant with Abraham and the fathers: thus Abraham became, as it were, the mediator of the covenant which God made with his whole race. By thus understanding the subject of the Prophet, it is easier for us to see why he mentions Abraham as well as God. Is there not one father , he says, to us all? that is, “Did not God select us from the rest of the world, when he promised to our father Abraham to be a God to him and to his seed? Since then God’s favor has flowed to us from that fountain, what sottishness it is to break that sacred bond by which God has joined us to himself in the person of Abraham?” For when the Jews did not consider that they derived their origin from the holy patriarch, the consequence was, that the covenant of God with them became void and of no effect. This then is the reason why he says, that one God was to them all a Father. And as other nations might have claimed the same privilege, he adds, Has not one God created us? He shows that the Jews had descended in no common or ordinary way from their holy father Abraham, but that God was the maker of his race, that he created them. Did not he also create the rest of the world? Not in the same manner; for this creation ought to be confined especially to the Church. God has created the whole human race; but he created also the race of Abraham: and hence the Church is often called in Isaiah the work and the formation of God, ( Isaiah 66:21 ,) and Paul also adopts the same mode of speaking, ( Ephesians 2:10 .) Our Prophet then does not mean that the Jews had been created by God when born into this world, but that they had become his holy and peculiar people. As then God had thus created the Jews, and had given to them one father, that being mindful of their origin they might remain united in true religion, the Prophet here reprobates their sottishness in casting away from themselves this invaluable favor of God. Every one dealt falsely with his brother ; and thus they violated the covenant of the fathers. As to the verb, נכגד , nubegad , it has been variously explained by grammarians; but as to what is meant it is agreed, that the Jews are here condemned, because they were not only perfidious to God, but also fraudulent as to their neighbors: and thus they doubled their perfidy, the proof which was manifest, because they did not act with sincerity towards their brethren. (226) Why then, he says, do we deal falsely with man, that is, every one with his own brother, so that we pollute the covenant of our fathers? Here the covenant of the fathers is to be taken for that separation or laying apart which we have mentioned, by which God had adopted Abraham and his posterity, that they might be separated from all the nations of the world. Hence under this covenant of the fathers is God himself included; and as this has not been perceived, it is no wonder that this passage has been so frigidly explained, and that Malachi has been as it were wholly buried in darkness; though interpreters have tried to bring light, yet the effect has been to pervert the real meaning of the Prophet. But it appears now plain, I think, that the Jews are here said to be guilty of a twofold perfidy — because they rejected the honor offered to them by God’s gratuitous election, and also because they acted fraudulently towards their own brethren. It hence followed that the covenant of the fathers, that is, what God had deposited with the patriarchs, that it might come from hand to hand to their posterity, had been violated and made void by their wickedness. We must yet notice what I have already referred to — that the priests are so reproved that the whole people are also included; and this we shall again presently see, and I add also, that the Prophet connects God with Abraham, in order to show that we shall fail to seek God effectually, if we seek him apart from his covenant, and also that our minds ought not to be

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-10

Source

선지자는 여기서 유대인들이 하나님과 그들 자신의 형제들에게 배신했다는 또 다른 죄를 고발한다. 그리고 하나님이 그들을 거룩하고 특별한 백성으로 다른 민족들보다 선호하여 선택하실 때 그들을 높이신 그 탁월함에서 떠났다는 것이다. 선지자는 이제 이 배은망덕을 책망한다. 그들 모두가 한 아버지를 가졌고, 모두 한 하나님께 창조되었다고 말함으로써.

"아버지"라는 말이 하나님에게 적용될 수도 있고 아브라함에게도 적용될 수 있다. 어떤 해석자들은 그것이 반복된다고 주장한다. 히브리어에서 일반적이지 않은 일이 아니기 때문이다. 그들은 모두가 하나님을 아버지로 두었다고 말한다. 그분이 그들 모두를 창조하셨기 때문에. 후자의 절이 설명으로 받아들여지는 것이다. 그러나 내 생각에는 그 말을 아브라함에게 적용하는 것이 더 낫고, 문맥이 이것을 요구한다. 절 끝에 주께서 그들의 조상들과 맺으신 언약이 위반되었다고 이어지기 때문이다.

이방인 아내들을 맞이한 것에 대한 책망이 곧 이어진다. 그러나 선지자는 아직 이 악함을 언급하지 않고, 일반적으로 그들이 부름받은 그 순수함을 지키지 않았다고 말하는 것 같다. 믿지 않는 자들과 하나님을 경멸하는 자들과 무분별하게 혼인했기 때문이다. 그러므로 선지자는 하나님이 그들을 자신의 거룩한 백성으로 입양하시기를 기뻐하실 때 그들이 높여진 그 위엄을 망각한 것을 불평한다.

따라서 내게는 여기서 하나님과 아브라함이 함께 언급되는 것이 타당한 것 같다. 하나님이 아브라함의 족속을 선택하시고 자신의 백성으로 입양하셨기 때문이다. 또한 아브라함과 조상들에게 자신의 언약을 맡기셨기 때문이다. 이렇게 아브라함은 말하자면 하나님이 그분의 온 족속과 맺으신 언약의 중보자가 되었다.

"우리에게 한 아버지가 없느냐?" 즉, "하나님이 우리에게 우리 아버지 아브라함에게 그와 그의 씨에게 하나님이 되겠다고 약속하실 때, 나머지 세상에서 우리를 선택하지 않으셨는가? 그러므로 하나님의 은혜가 그 샘에서 우리에게 흘러왔다. 이 거룩한 유대를 끊는 것이 얼마나 우매한가?"

유대인들이 거룩한 족장에서 자신들의 기원을 인식하지 못했을 때, 그 결과 그들과 하나님의 언약이 무효가 되고 효력이 없게 되었다. 이것이 한 하나님이 그들 모두에게 아버지가 되셨다고 말하는 이유이다. 다른 민족들도 같은 특권을 주장할 수 있었으므로, "한 하나님이 우리를 창조하지 않으셨느냐?"고 덧붙인다. 그는 유대인들이 거룩한 아버지 아브라함에게서 보통의 방식으로 내려온 것이 아니라, 하나님이 그 족속의 창조자이시고 그들을 창조하셨음을 보인다. 그분이 나머지 세상도 창조하지 않으셨는가? 같은 방식으로는 아니다. 이 창조가 특히 교회에 국한되어야 하기 때문이다. 하나님이 온 인류를 창조하셨다. 그러나 아브라함의 족속도 창조하셨다. 그러므로 교회는 이사야에서 종종 하나님의 역사와 형성이라 불린다. 바울도 같은 말하는 방식을 채택한다.

"어찌하여 우리가 각각 자기 형제에게 궤사를 행함으로써 조상들의 언약을 욕되게 하느냐?" 조상들의 언약이란 우리가 언급한 그 분리 혹은 구별로 이해된다. 하나님이 아브라함과 그의 후손을 입양하셔서 그들이 온 세상의 민족들로부터 구별되도록 하신 것이다. 그러므로 이 조상들의 언약 아래 하나님 자신이 포함되어 있다.

원주석

11절 카드 ↗

The Prophet now explains how the Jews departed from the covenant of their fathers, and he exaggerates their sin and says, that abomination was done in Israel; as though he had said, that this perfidy was abominable. Some render the verb, בגד , begad , (227) transgressed, and so it is often taken in Hebrew: but as in the last verse the Prophet had said, נבגד , nubegad , “Why do we deal perfidiously every one with his brother?” I doubt not but that it is repeated here in the same sense. But as I have already stated, he shows the crime to be detestable, and says that it existed in Judah and in Jerusalem . God had indeed, as it is well known, preferred that tribe to others; and it was not a common favor that the Jews almost alone returned to their own country, while others nearly all remained in their dispersions. He adds Jerusalem , not for honor’s sake, but for greater reproach, as though he had said, that not only some of the race of Abraham were subject to this condemnation, but that even the Jews were so, who had been allowed to return to their own country, and that even the holy city rendered itself subject to this reproof, in which the temple was, the sanctuary of God, which was then alone the true one in the whole world. By these circumstances then does the Prophet enhance their crime. But he immediately comes to particulars: Polluted , he says, has Judah the holiness of Jehovah, which he loved ; (228) that is, because they individually indulged their lusts, and procured for themselves wives from heathen nations. Some take, קדש , kodash , for the sanctuary or the temple; others for the keeping of the law; but I prefer to apply it to the covenant itself; and we might suitably take it in a collective sense, except the simpler meaning be more approved — that Judah polluted his separation. As to the Prophet’s object and the subject itself, he charges them here, I have no doubt, with profanation, because the Jews rendered themselves vile, though God had consecrated them to himself. They had then polluted holiness , even when they had been separated from the world; for they had disregarded so great an honor, by which they might have been pre-eminent, had they continued in their integrity. It may be also taken collectively, they have polluted holiness , that is, they have polluted that nation which has been separated from other nations: but as this exposition may seem hard and somewhat strained, I am inclined to think that what is here meant is that separation by which the Jews were known from other nations. But yet what I have stated may serve to remove whatever obscurity there may be. And that this holiness ought to be referred to that gratuitous election by which God had adopted the Jews as his peculiar people, is evident from what the Prophet says, that they married foreign wives. (229) We then see the purpose of this passage, which is to show, — that the Jews were ungrateful to God, because they mingled with heathen nations, and knowingly and wilfully cast aside that glory by which God had adorned them by choosing them, as Moses says, to be to him a royal priesthood. ( Exodus 19:6 .) Holiness, we know, was much recommended to the Jews, in order that they might not abandon themselves to any of the pollutions of the heathens. Hence God had forbidden them under the law to take foreign wives, except they were first purified, as we find in Deuteronomy 21:11 ; if any one wished to marry a captive, she was to have her head shaven and her nails pared; by which it was intimated, that such women were impure, and that their husbands would be contaminated, except they were first purified. And, yet it was not wholly a blameless thing, when one observed the law as to a captive: but it was a lust abominable to God, when they were not content with their own nation, and burnt in love with strange women. As however the Jews, like all mortals without exception, were inclined to corruptions, God purposed to keep them together as one people, lest the wife by her flatteries should draw the husband away from the pure and legitimate worship of God. And Moses tells us, that there was a crafty counsel given by Balsam when he saw that the people could not be conquered in open war; he at length invented this artifice, that the heathens should offer to them their wives and their daughters. It hence happened that the people provoked God’s wrath, as we find it recorded in Numbers 25:4 . As then the Jews after their return had again lapsed into this corruption, it is not without reason that the Prophet so severely reproves them, and that he says, that by marrying strange women they had polluted holiness, or that separation, which was their great honor, as God had adopted them alone as his people; and he calls it a holiness which God loved. Thus their crime was doubled, because God had not only bound them to himself, but he had also embraced them gratuitously. For if the cause of the separation be enquired, whether they excelled other nations, or whether they had any worthiness or merit? the answer is, No; but God loved them freely. For by the word love, the Prophet means the mere kindness and bounty of God, with which he favored Abraham and his race, without regard to any worthiness or excellency. He therefore condemns them for this ingratitude, because they had not only departed from the covenant which the Lord had made with their fathers, but had also neglected and despised that gratuitous love, which ought to have softened even their iron hearts. For if God had found anything in them as a reason why he preferred them to other nations, they might have been more excusable, at least they might have extenuated their fault; but since God had adopted them as his peculiar people, though they were unworthy and wholly undeserving, they must surely have been extremely brutish, to have thus despised the gratuitous favor of God. Their baseness then is increased, as I have said, by this circumstance, — that so great a kindness

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-11

Source

선지자는 이제 유대인들이 어떻게 조상들의 언약에서 떠났는지를 설명하고 그들의 죄를 가중시킨다. 이스라엘에서 가증한 일이 행해졌다고. 마치 그가 이 배신이 가증하다고 말하는 것 같다. 어떤 이들은 이 동사를 "범했다"로 번역한다. 히브리어에서 종종 이렇게 사용되기 때문이다. 그러나 지난 절에서 선지자가 "어찌하여 우리가 각각 자기 형제에게 궤사를 행하느냐?"고 말했으므로, 여기서도 같은 의미로 반복된다고 의심하지 않는다.

선지자는 그 죄가 증오스럽다고 보이고, "유다에서와 예루살렘에서" 있었다고 말한다. 하나님이 다른 지파들보다 그 지파를 선호하셨음은 잘 알려져 있다. 거의 유대인들만이 자국으로 돌아오고 다른 이들은 거의 모두 흩어진 곳에 남아 있었던 것이 보통이 아닌 은혜였다. 그는 영예가 아니라 더 큰 책망을 위해 예루살렘을 덧붙인다. 마치 아브라함 족속의 일부만이 아니라 자국으로 돌아가도록 허용된 유대인들도, 심지어 당시 온 세상에서 유일한 하나님의 성소인 성전이 있는 거룩한 도성도 이 책망을 받는다고 말하는 것 같다.

그런 다음 그는 구체적으로 이야기한다. "유다가 여호와의 거룩한 것 곧 여호와께서 사랑하시는 것을 더럽혔도다." 즉, 각자가 욕망에 빠져 이방 나라들에서 아내들을 데려왔기 때문이다. 어떤 이들은 여기서 "거룩함"을 성소나 성전으로 받아들인다. 다른 이들은 율법의 준수로 본다. 나는 언약 자체에 적용하는 것이 더 낫다고 생각한다. 유다가 자신들의 분리를 더럽혔다는 것으로 볼 수도 있다. 선지자의 목적과 주제에 관해서, 여기서 유대인들이 하나님이 그들을 자신에게 거룩하게 하셨음에도 스스로를 비천하게 만들었다는 이유로 모독을 고발하고 있음은 의심하지 않는다.

유대인들에게 거룩함이 크게 권면된 것은, 그들이 이방인들의 오염들에 자신들을 버리지 않도록 하기 위해서였음을 우리는 안다. 그러므로 하나님은 그들에게 율법 아래서 이방 아내들을 취하는 것을 금하셨다. 그러나 유대인들이 자신들의 민족으로 만족하지 않고 이방 여자들에 대한 욕망으로 불탔을 때, 그것은 하나님께 가증한 욕정이었다. 하나님은 그들을 하나의 백성으로 함께 유지하여, 아내가 아첨으로 남편을 하나님의 순수하고 합법적인 예배에서 끌어내지 않도록 하셨다. 그리고 모세는 발람이 간계를 꾸몄다고 알려준다. 열린 전쟁으로 그들이 이길 수 없음을 보고, 이 책략을 만들어냈다 — 이방인들이 그들에게 아내들과 딸들을 제공하는 것이다. 그래서 백성이 하나님의 진노를 자극했음이 민수기 25:4에 기록되어 있다.

유대인들이 귀환 후에 다시 이 부패에 빠졌으므로, 선지자가 이렇게 심하게 그들을 책망하고, 이방 여자들과 혼인함으로써 그들이 "여호와께서 사랑하시는 거룩함"을 더럽혔다고 말하는 것은 이유가 없지 않다. 이렇게 그들의 죄가 두 배가 되었다. 하나님이 그들을 자신에게 묶으셨을 뿐 아니라, 그들을 값없이 품으셨기 때문이다. 이 분리의 원인이 그들이 다른 민족들보다 뛰어나거나 어떤 공로나 가치가 있는지에서 찾아진다면, 대답은 아니오이다. 하나님이 그들을 값없이 사랑하셨기 때문이다.

원주석

12절 카드 ↗

The Prophet here teaches us, that neither the priests nor the people would go unpunished, because they had mingled with the pollutions of the heathens, and profaned and violated the covenant of God. God then says, Cut off (the word means to scrape off or to blot out) shall God the man who has done this, the mover , or prompter, as well as the respondent (230) Jerome renders the last words, the master and the disciple; and interpreters vary. Some indeed explain the terms allegorically, and apply them to the dead; but by the mover, I have no doubt, he understands every one who was in power, and could command others, and by the respondent the man who was subject to the authority of his master. The masters then prompted or roused, for it belonged to them to command; and the servants responded, for it was their duty to receive orders and to obey them. It is the same as though the Prophet had said, that God would punish this perfidy, without passing by any, so that he would spare neither the common people nor the chief men: and he also adds the priests, intimating, that the priests themselves would not be excepted. In short, he denounces punishment on the Jews universally, and shows that however prevalent had this impiety become everywhere, and that though every one thought that whatever was commonly practiced was lawful, yet God would become an avenger, and would include in the same punishment both the masters and the servants, and would not exempt the priests, who considered themselves safe by peculiar privilege. The rest tomorrow. (230) Him that teacheth and him that answereth. —Newcome or , Him that passeth out and him that returneth. —Ib. Him that watcheth and him that answereth. —Henderson The teacher and the scholar. —Drusius and Grotius The most literal rendering is, — The rouser and the respondent, ער ועגה It seems to mean the leader in the faction and his assistant, the bold answer of his wickedness and his timid follower. Such we find to be in all factions. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-13" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-12

Source

선지자는 여기서 이방인들의 오염과 혼합하고 하나님의 언약을 모독하고 위반한 자들이 처벌받지 않고 지나가지 않을 것임을 가르친다. 하나님이 말씀하신다. "이 일을 행하는 사람을 하나님이 끊어버리시리라. 그것이 선동하는 자이든 응하는 자이든." 어떤 이들은 이를 죽은 자에게 적용하지만, "선동하는 자"는 의심할 바 없이 권세를 가진 모든 사람 곧 다른 이들을 명령할 수 있는 자를, "응하는 자"는 주인의 권위에 복종하는 사람을 의미한다. 주인들은 선동하거나 자극했다. 명령하는 것이 그들의 일이었기 때문이다. 그리고 종들이 응했다. 명령을 받고 순종하는 것이 그들의 의무였기 때문이다.

선지자가 말하는 것은 마치 이렇게 말하는 것과 같다 — 하나님이 이 배신을 벌하시되 아무도 지나치지 않고, 일반 백성도 귀인들도 아끼지 않으실 것이라고. 그는 또한 제사장들을 덧붙이는데, 제사장들 자신도 예외가 아닐 것임을 암시한다. 요컨대 그는 유대인들 보편에 형벌을 선포하고, 이 불경건이 어디서나 만연해지고 일반적으로 행해지는 것은 무엇이든 합법적이라고 모두가 생각할지라도, 하나님이 복수자가 되셔서 주인들과 종들을 같은 형벌에 포함시키시고, 특별한 특권으로 자신들이 안전하다고 여기는 제사장들도 면제하지 않으실 것임을 보인다.

원주석

13절 카드 ↗

The Prophet amplifies again the fault of the priests, because the people, when they perceived that God was adverse to them, found no means of pacifying him. And when men have an idea that God is inexorable to them, every zeal for religion must necessarily decay; and hence it is said in Psalms 130:4 — “With thee is propitiation, that thou mayest be feared.” As the people then gained nothing by sacrificing, they had now nearly fallen off from divine worship. This evil, a most grievous one, the Prophet says, was to be justly ascribed to the priests; for as they were become polluted, how could their persons have been accepted by God, that they might be mediators to expiate sins and to pacify God? This is the real meaning of the Prophet, which none of the interpreters have perceived. The Rabbins think that the priests are here reproved, because their wives filled the altar in the sanctuary with weeping, because they saw that their husbands did not faithfully treat them, according to the law of marriage; and almost all have agreed with them. Thus then they explain the verse — Ye have in the second place done this ; that is, “That sin was of itself sufficiently grievous, when ye suffered lean victims to be sacrificed to me, as it were in mockery; but in addition to this comes your sin against your wives, who continually complain and deplore their condition before the altar of God, even because they are not loved by you, as the right of marriage requires.” They thus refer the tears, the weeping, and lamentation, to the wives of the priests, which were so cruelly treated by their husbands: they were not able to do anything else than to fill God’s sanctuary with their constant complaints. Hence they render, מאין עוד פנות , main oud penut , “I will not therefore regard,” or, “no one regards;” but both versions are not only obscure, but wholly pervert the sense of the Prophet. But what I have already stated is the most suitable — that it was to be ascribed to the priests that no one could from the heart worship God, at least with a cheerful and willing mind; for God was implacable to the people, because the only way of obtaining favor under the law was when the priests, who represented the Mediator, humbly entreated pardon in the name of the whole people. But how could God attend to the prayers of the priests when they had polluted his altar by the filth of wickedness? We then see the object of this amplification — Ye cover the altar of Jehovah with tears, with weeping and wailing . The praises of God ought to have resounded in the temple, according to what is said — “Praise, O God, waits for thee in Zion.” ( Psalms 65:1 .) And the principal sacrifice was, that the people exercised themselves in contemplating the blessings of God, and in thanksgiving. But he says that none went forth before the altar with a cheerful mind, but all were sad and sorrowful, because they found that God was severe and rigid. And the reason is added — מאין עוד פנות , main oud penut , literally, “Is it not any more by regarding,” etc.? It is easy to see how far they depart from the meaning of the Prophet who read — “They shall therefore offer no more;” for is this to be applied to God? Others also, who give this rendering — “I shall not therefore accept,” pervert also the very letter of the text. But the most appropriate meaning is this — that all wept and groaned before the altar, because they saw that they came there without any advantage, that their sacrifices did not please God, and that the whole worship was in vain, inasmuch as God did not answer their prayers. The Prophet ascribes the fault to the priests, that God did not turn to mercy, so as to forgive the people when they sacrificed. With weeping, then, he says, was the altar filled or covered, because God received not what pleased him from their hand ; that is, because no victims pleased him which were offered by polluted and impure hands. (231) He afterwards joins (231) It is not easy to give a version of this verse. Henderson renders the first line thus — And this ye have done the second time. The reference is, he says, to the repetition of the evil which had been corrected under Ezra 9:0 and 10. This seems probable; but we may view this “second,” or again, with regard to the previous denunciations. What are regarded as verbs in the infinitive mood are in my view participial nouns; the last, לקחת , is evidently so. Then the literal rendering would be this— And this again ye do — Covering with tears the altar, Weeping and groaning, Because there is no more turning to the offering, Or the receiving of what is acceptable from your hand. That מאין is to be rendered “because not,” or, “inasmuch as not,” is evident from other places. See Jeremiah 10:6 . “Turning” signifies having a regard to. “What is acceptable,” רצון , is rendered “ δεκτον — acceptable,” in the Septuagint ; “ ἑυδοκίαν —good-will,” by Aq.; “ τὸ ευδοκημένον — what is approved,” by Sym . ; “ τέλαιον — perfect,” by Theodoret The difference between Calvin and most expositors after him, as well as before him, is, that he regarded the lamentation to have been by the priests and people, and they by the repudiated wives. The cause of the weeping, as stated here, was the rejection of the offerings, as declared by the Prophet; and this seems enough to confirm Calvin’s view. The priests and people had been denounced for their wickedness, especially for marrying strange wives. After this denunciation they “again” went to the altar and wept because God would not receive their sacrifices; and they did this without amending their ways. Then in the next verse the Prophet explains why God would not receive their offerings. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-14" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-13

Source

선지자는 제사장들의 과실을 다시 부각시킨다. 백성이 하나님이 그들에게 역경하심을 인식할 때, 그분을 달래는 방법을 찾지 못했기 때문이다. 사람들이 하나님이 그들에게 완강하다는 생각을 가질 때, 모든 종교에 대한 열정이 반드시 사라진다. 그러므로 시편 130:4에 이렇게 말씀하셨다. "주께는 용서하심이 있음으로 경외함을 받으시리라."

백성이 제사를 드려도 아무것도 얻지 못했으므로, 이제 거의 신성한 예배에서 떠날 뻔했다. 이 매우 심각한 악을 선지자는 제사장들에게 정당하게 귀속시킨다고 말한다. 그들이 더럽혀졌으므로, 어떻게 그들의 사람이 죄를 속죄하고 하나님을 달래는 중보자가 되도록 하나님께 받아들여질 수 있겠는가?

"너희가 또 이 일을 행하도다. 눈물과 울음과 탄식으로 여호와의 제단을 가리는도다." 하나님의 찬양이 성전에서 울려 퍼져야 했다. "찬양이 주를 기다리나이다, 오 하나님이여, 시온에서." 그리고 주된 제물은 백성이 하나님의 복들을 묵상하고 감사함에 자신들을 훈련하는 것이었다. 그러나 그분은 아무도 기쁜 마음으로 제단 앞에 나가지 않고, 모두가 슬프고 근심하다고 말한다. 하나님이 엄하고 완고하심을 발견했기 때문이다.

이유가 덧붙여진다. 문자적으로는 "더 이상 돌아봄이 없이." 그들이 아무런 유익도 없이 그곳에 나아온다는 것을, 그들의 제물이 하나님을 기쁘게 하지 않는다는 것을, 하나님이 그들의 기도에 응답하지 않으시므로 온 예배가 헛되다는 것을 보았기 때문이다. 선지자는 그 과실을 제사장들에게 귀속시킨다. 그들이 제사를 드릴 때 하나님이 백성을 용서하도록 자비로 돌이키시지 않은 것이 그들 때문이었다. "눈물로," 그는 말한다. "제단이 덮였다. 하나님이 그들의 손에서 기뻐하시는 것을 받지 않으셨기 때문이다." 즉, 더럽고 불결한 손으로 드려진 어떤 희생제물도 그분을 기쁘게 하지 않았기 때문에.

원주석

14절 카드 ↗

The Prophet tells us here as before how prone the priests were to make a clamor, and it is a very common thing with hypocrites immediately to set up a shield to cover their vices whenever they are reproved; and hence it appears, that men are in a manner fascinated by Satan, when they attain such hardness as to dare to answer God, and with obstreperous words to repel all warnings. Malachi has several times already used this mode of speaking; we may hence conclude, that the people had become then so hardened that warnings were of no account with them. But he mentions one particular, by which it seems evident that they had lapsed into vices which were not to be borne. There is indeed no doubt but that he points out one of the many vices which prevailed. There is then in this verse an instance of stating one thing for the whole, as though he had said, “Your hypocrisy is extremely gross; but, to omit other things, by what pretext can you excuse this perfidy — that there is no conjugal fidelity among you? Were there any integrity and a sense of religion in men, they would surely appear in their conjugal connection; but ye have cast away all shame, and have taken to yourselves many wives. There is then no ground for you to think that you can escape by evasions, because this one glaring vice sufficiently proves your guilt.” This is the import of the Prophet’s answer. We have indeed seen that the priests were implicated in other vices; the Prophet then does not now charge them with perfidy as though they were free from other sins, but he meant to show, as I have already said, by one thing, how wickedly and shamelessly they sought to evade God’s judgment, though they had violated the marriage pledge, which was wholly to destroy the very order of nature; for there can be, as it has been already said, no chastity in social life except the bond of marriage be preserved, for marriage, so to speak, is the fountain of mankind. But in order to press the matter more on the priests, he calls their attention to the fact that God is the founder of marriage. Testified has Jehovah , he says, between thee and thy wife (232) He intimates in these words, that when a marriage takes place between a man and a woman, God presides and requires a mutual pledge from both. Hence Solomon, in Proverbs 2:17 , calls marriage the covenant of God, for it is superior to all human contracts. So also Malachi declares, that God is as it were the stipulator, who by his authority joins the man to the woman, and sanctions the alliance: God then has testified between thee and thy wife , as though he had said, “Thou hast violated not only all human laws, but also the compact which God himself has consecrated, and which ought justly to be deemed more sacred than all other compacts: as then God has testified between thee and thy wife, and thou now deceivest her, how darest thou to come to the altar? and how canst thou think that God will be pleased with thy sacrifices or regard thy oblations?” He calls her the wife of his youth , because the more filthy is the lust when husbands cast away conjugal love as to those wives whom they have married in their youth. The bond of marriage is indeed in all cases inviolable, even between the old, but it is a circumstance which increases the turpitude of the deed, when any one alienates himself from a wife whom he married when a girl and in the flower of her age: for youth conciliates love; and we also see that when a husband and his wife have lived together for many years, mutual love prevails between them to extreme old age, because their hearts were united together in their youth. It is not then without reason that this circumstance is mentioned, for the lust of the priests was the more filthy and as it were the more monstrous, because they forsook wives whom they ought to have regarded with the tenderest love, as they had married them when they were young: Thou hast dealt unfaithfully with her, he says, though she was thy consort and the wife of thy covenant He calls her a consort, or companion, or associate, (233) because marriage, we know, is contracted on this condition — that the wife is to become as it were the half part of the man. As then the bond of marriage is inseparable, the Prophet here goads the priests, yea, touches them to the quick, when he reproves them for being unmindful of what was natural, inasmuch as they had blotted out of their minds the memory of a most sacred covenant. The wife of thy covenant is to be taken for a covenanted wife, that is, “The wife who has been united to thee by God’s authority, that there might be no separation; but all integrity is violated, and as it were abolished.” He then adds (232) Or, “a witness has Jehovah been between thee and thy wife.” But Theodoret , Cyril , and Jerome , and also Cocceius , refer this to God’s testimony in the first institution of marriage, in Genesis 2:24 . More suitabele to the context no doubt is to consider God as a witness to the marriage contract; and this is the view taken by Drusius , Henry , Scott , Newcome , and Henderson . — Ed. (233) “ Κοινωνός — partner,” by the Septuagint ; “ ὁμόσαρκος — of the same flesh,” by Cyril ; “ particeps — partner,” by Jerome ; “companion,” in our version, and by Newcome and Henderson . The word comes from חבר , to conjoin, to couple, to fit together. “Partner” perhaps would be the most appropriate term. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-15" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-14

Source

선지자는 여기서도 제사장들이 책망받을 때마다 즉시 자신들의 악함을 덮을 방패를 세우는 경향이 있었음을 알려준다. 이것이 위선자들에게 매우 흔한 일이다. 그러므로 사람들이 하나님께 답하기를 감히 하고 소리 높여 모든 경고들을 물리치는 완악함을 얻을 때, 그들은 말하자면 사탄에게 사로잡힌다고 볼 수 있다.

말라기는 이미 이 말하는 방식을 여러 번 사용했다. 이로써 우리는 당시 백성이 이토록 굳어져서 경고들이 그들에게 아무런 가치도 없었다는 결론을 내릴 수 있다. 그러나 그는 한 특별한 것을 언급한다. 이것으로 그들이 묵과될 수 없는 악함에 빠졌음이 분명하다.

그는 여기서 한 가지로 전체를 나타내는 방식으로 말한다. 마치 이렇게 말하는 것 같다. "너희의 위선이 극도로 크다. 그러나 다른 것들을 제쳐두고, 너희 사이에 부부 간의 신의가 없다는 이 배신을 어떤 구실로 변명할 수 있는가? 사람들에게 어떤 온전함과 종교적 감각이 있다면, 분명 그들의 부부 관계에서 나타날 것이다. 그러나 너희는 모든 수치심을 버리고 많은 아내들을 취했다. 그러므로 너희가 회피로 피할 수 있다고 생각할 이유가 없다. 이 하나의 두드러진 악함이 너희의 죄를 충분히 증명하기 때문이다."

제사장들이 다른 악함에도 연루되어 있음을 우리는 보았다. 선지자는 그러므로 그들이 다른 죄들에서 자유롭다는 것처럼 이제 배신으로 고발하는 것이 아니다. 이미 말한 것처럼, 그는 하나의 것으로 그들이 얼마나 악하고 뻔뻔스럽게 하나님의 심판을 회피하려 했는지를 보이려 했다. 혼인의 서약을 위반하면서도, 사실상 자연의 질서 자체를 파괴하면서도. 자연의 질서가 파괴된다는 것이 사실이다. 혼인의 유대가 지켜지지 않으면 사회적 생활에서 순결이 있을 수 없기 때문이다.

제사장들을 더 압박하기 위해, 그는 하나님이 혼인의 창시자이심을 그들에게 상기시킨다. "여호와는 너와 네 어린 시절의 아내 사이에서 증거하신 분이니라." 이 말로써 남자와 여자 사이에 혼인이 이루어질 때, 하나님이 주관하시고 양측에서 상호 서약을 요구하신다는 것을 암시한다. 그러므로 솔로몬은 잠언 2:17에서 혼인을 하나님의 언약이라 부른다. 그것이 모든 인간의 계약보다 우월하기 때문이다. 말라기도 마찬가지로 선포한다. 하나님이 말하자면 약정인이 되셔서 그분의 권위로 남자를 여자에게 연합시키시고 그 연합을 거룩하게 하신다고.

그는 그녀를 "어린 시절의 아내"라 부른다. 남편들이 젊어서 혼인한 아내들에 대한 부부 간의 사랑을 버릴 때 욕망이 더 더럽기 때문이다. 혼인의 유대는 모든 경우에 불가침이다. 심지어 노인들 사이에서도. 그러나 젊을 때 아내가 된 여자에게서 소원해지는 것은 행위의 추악함을 더하는 상황이다. 젊음이 사랑을 일으키기 때문이다. 또한 남편과 아내가 여러 해 동안 함께 살 때, 그들의 마음이 젊음에서 연합되었으므로 극도의 노년까지 상호 사랑이 지속됨을 우리는 본다.

그녀를 "동무"라고 부른다. 혼인이 이 조건으로 맺어진다는 것을 우리는 안다 — 아내는 남자의 말하자면 절반이 되어야 한다는 것이다. 혼인의 유대가 불가분이므로, 선지자는 제사장들을 자극하고 그들에게 실질적으로 와 닿게 한다. 그들이 자연스러운 것을 잊고 가장 거룩한 언약의 기억을 마음에서 지워버린 것을 책망하면서. "네 언약의 아내"는 언약에 의해 결합된 아내로 이해된다. 즉, "하나님의 권위로 너와 연합되어 이별이 없도록 한 아내이다. 그러나 온 온전함이 위반되고 말하자면 폐지되었다."

원주석

15절 카드 ↗

There is in this verse some obscurity, and hence it has been that no interpreter has come to the meaning of the Prophet. The Rabbins almost all agree that Abraham is spoken of here. Were we to receive this view a two-fold meaning might be given. It may be an objection, — “Has not one done this?” that is, has not Abraham, who is the one father of the nations, given us an example? for he married many wives: and thus many explain the passage, as though the priests raised an objection and defended the corruption just condemned by the example of Abraham, — “Has not one done this while yet an excellency of spirit was in him?” We indeed know how prone men are to pretend the authority of fathers when they wish to cover their own vices. Others prefer regarding the words as spoken by the Prophet himself, and at the same time say that there is here an anticipation of an objection, and think that an occasion for an excuse is here cut off, as though the Prophet had said, “Did not Abraham, when he was one alone, do this?” For as the Jews might have adduced the example of Abraham, the interpreters, whose opinion I now refer to, think that a difference is here stated, as though he had said, “Ye reason badly, for every one of you is led to polygamy by the lust of your flesh; but it was far otherwise with Abraham, for he was one, that is, alone;” and in Isaiah Abraham is called one on account of his having no children. The meaning then they think is this, “Was not Abraham forced by necessity to take another wife? even because he had no child and no hope of the promised seed. Lust then did not stimulate your father Abraham, as it does you, but a desire of having an offspring.” And they think, that this view is confirmed by what follows, “And why alone seeking the seed of God?” that is, the object of holy Abraham was far otherwise than to indulge his lust; for he sought that holy seed, the hope of which was taken away from him on account of the barrenness of his wife, and of her great age. When therefore Abraham saw that his wife was barren, and that she could no more conceive on account of her old age, he had recourse to the last remedy: hence the mistake of Abraham might have been excused, since his object was right; for he sought the seed of God, the seed in which all nations were to be blessed. Thus far have I told you what others think. I thought twelve years ago that this passage ought to have been otherwise rendered in the French Bibles, and that, אחד , ached , ought to be read in the objective case; “Has he not made one?” Jerome seems to me to have had a better notion of what the Prophet means than what others have taught; but he could not attain the real meaning, and therefore stopped as it were in the middle of his course. He read the word in the nominative case, “Has not one,” that is, God, “made them? “and then he added, “And in him alone,” that is, Abraham, “was an exuberant spirit.” We see how he dared not to assert anything, nor did he explain what was necessary. The sense is indeed suspended, and is even frigid, if we say, “Has not one made them?” but if we read, “Has he not made one?” (234) there is no ambiguity. It is a common thing in Hebrew, we know, that the name of God is often not expressed, when he is referred to; for so great is He, that his name may be easily understood, though not expressed. It ought not therefore to confuse us, that the Prophet withholds the name of God, and mentions a verb without its subject, for such is the usage, as I have said, of the Hebrew language. I proceed now to explain the meaning of the Prophet. Has he not made one? that is, Was not God content with one man, when he instituted marriage? and yet the residue of the Spirit was in him . The Rabbins take, שאר , shar , as meaning excellence; but I know not what reason have induced them, except that they ventured to change the sense of the word, because they could not otherwise extricate themselves; for the mistake, that Abraham is spoken of here, had wholly possessed their minds. What then is, שאר רוח , shar ruch ? Excellence of Spirit, say they; but, שאר , shar , we know, is residue or remnant: what then remains of anything is called, שאר , shar ; for the verb means to remain and to lean. Here then the Prophet takes the residue of the Spirit, so to speak, for overflowing power; for God could have given to one man two or three wives; inasmuch as the Spirit failed him not in forming one woman: as he inspired Eve with life, so also he might have created other women and imparted to them his Spirit. He might then have given two or four or ten women to one man; for there was a spirit remaining in him. We now then understand what the Prophet means at the beginning of this verse. But before we proceed farther, we must bear in mind his object, which was, to break down all those frivolous pretences by which the Jews sought to cover their perfidy. He says, that in marriage we ought to recognize an ordinance divinely appointed, or, to speak more distinctly, that the institution of marriage is a perpetual law, which it is not right to violate: there is therefore no cause for men to devise for themselves various laws, for God’s authority is here to be regarded alone; and this is more clearly explained in Matthew 19:8 ; where Christ, refuting the objection of the Jews as to divorce, says, “From the beginning it was not so.” Though the law allowed a bill of divorce to be given to wives, yet Christ denies this to be right, — by what argument? even because the institution was not of that kind; for it was, as it has been said, an inviolable bond. So now our Prophet reasons, Has not God made one? that is, “consider within yourselves whether God, when he created man and instituted marriage, gave many wives to one man? By no means. Ye see then that spurious and contrary to the character of a true and pure marriage is everything, that does not harmonize with its first institution.” But some one may ask here, why the Prophet say

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-15

Source

이 절에 어느 정도 모호함이 있다. 그러므로 어떤 해석자도 선지자의 의미에 이르지 못했다. 랍비들은 거의 모두 여기서 아브라함에 대해 말한다는 것에 동의한다. 이 견해를 받아들인다면 두 가지 의미를 줄 수 있다. "그 한 사람이 이 일을 행하지 않았느냐?" 즉, 모든 민족의 한 아버지인 아브라함이 우리에게 예를 주지 않았는가? 그가 많은 아내들과 혼인했기 때문이다.

나는 십이 년 전에 이 구절이 프랑스어 성경에서 달리 번역되었어야 한다고 생각했다. "그분이 하나를 만들지 않으셨느냐?"로 읽어야 한다. 예로니모는 내가 보기에 다른 이들이 가르친 것보다 선지자의 의미를 더 잘 파악했던 것 같다. 그러나 그는 실제 의미에 이르지 못하고 중간에 멈추어 버렸다. 그는 그 말을 주격으로 읽었다. "한 분이," 즉 하나님이 "그들을 만들지 않으셨느냐?" 그런 다음 그는 "그에게만, 즉 아브라함에게만 풍성한 영이 있었다"고 덧붙였다.

히브리어에서 하나님의 이름이 그분을 가리키면서도 종종 표현되지 않는다는 것은 우리가 안다. 이것이 선지자가 하나님의 이름을 보류하고 주어 없이 동사를 언급한다고 해서 당혹스럽지 않아야 할 이유이다.

그러면 이 선지자의 의미를 설명해 보자. "그분이 하나를 만들지 않으셨느냐?" 즉, 하나님이 혼인을 제정하실 때 한 여자로 만족하지 않으셨느냐? "그러나 그에게 영의 나머지가 있었다." 랍비들은 "탁월함"으로 받아들인다. 그러나 어떤 이유가 그들을 그렇게 만들었는지 나는 모른다. "나머지"(שאר, shar)는 남음 혹은 나머지를 의미한다. 그러므로 선지자는 말하자면 과잉 능력을 위해 영의 나머지를 취하는 것 같다. 하나님이 한 여자를 형성하는 데 영이 실패하지 않으셨기 때문이다. 이브에게 생기를 불어넣으신 것처럼 다른 여자들도 창조하시고 그들에게 자신의 영을 나누어 주실 수 있었다. 그러므로 한 남자에게 둘이나 넷이나 열 명의 여자를 주실 수 있었다. 영의 나머지가 그에게 있었기 때문이다.

선지자가 이 절 처음에 의미하는 것을 이제 이해했다. 그러나 더 나아가기 전에 그의 목적을 기억해야 한다. 유대인들이 자신들의 배신을 덮으려 했던 모든 사소한 핑계들을 무너뜨리는 것이었다. 그는 혼인에서 우리가 신적으로 임명된 규례를 인식해야 한다고 말한다. 더 분명히 말하면 혼인의 제도는 영속적인 법이어서 위반하는 것이 옳지 않다는 것이다. 그러므로 사람들이 자신들을 위해 다양한 법들을 고안할 이유가 없다. 하나님의 권위만이 여기서 고려되어야 하기 때문이다.

마태복음 19:8에서 그리스도가 이혼에 관한 유대인들의 반론을 반박하시면서 말씀하신 것으로 더 분명히 설명된다. "처음부터 이렇지 않았다." 비록 율법이 아내들에게 이혼장을 주는 것을 허용했을지라도, 그리스도는 이것이 옳지 않다고 부인하신다 — 어떤 논거로? 그 제도가 그런 종류가 아니었기 때문이다. 이미 말한 것처럼 불가침한 유대였기 때문이다.

그러므로 이제 선지자는 이렇게 논증한다. "하나님이 하나를 만들지 않으셨느냐?" 즉, "하나님이 사람을 창조하시고 혼인을 제정하실 때, 한 남자에게 많은 아내들을 주셨는지를 스스로 고려하라. 결코 아니다. 그러므로 참되고 순수한 혼인의 성격과 조화되지 않는 모든 것은 불법이고 그 최초의 제도와 반대되는 것임을 안다."

원주석

16절 카드 ↗

Here again the Prophet exaggerates the crime which the priests regarded as nothing; for he says, that they sinned more grievously than if they had repudiated their wives. We indeed know that repudiation, properly speaking, had never been allowed by God; for though it was not punished under the law, yet it was not permitted. (236) It was the same as with a magistrate, who is constrained to bear many things which he does not approve; for we cannot so deal with mankind as to restrain all vices. It is indeed desirable, that no vice should be tolerated; but we must have a regard to what is possible. Hence Moses has specified no punishment, according to the heinousness of the crime, if one repudiated his wife; and yet it was never permitted. But if a comparison be made, Malachi says, that it is a lighter crime to dismiss a wife than to marry many wives. We hence learn how abominable polygamy is in the sight of God. I do not consider polygamy to be what the foolish Papists have made it, who call not those polygamists who have many wives at the same time, but those who marry another when the former one is dead. This is gross ignorance. Polygamy, properly so called, is when a person takes many wives, as it was commonly done in the East: and those nations, we know, have always been libidinous, and never observe the marriage vow. As then their lasciviousness was so great that they were like brute beasts, every one married several wives; and this abuse continues at this day among the Turks and the Persian and other nations. Here, however, where God compares polygamy with divorce, he says that polygamy is the worse and more detestable crime; for the husband impurely connects himself with another woman, and then, not only deals unfaithfully with his wife to whom he is bound, but also forcibly detains her: thus his crime is doubled. For if he replies and says that he keeps the wife to whom he is bound, he is yet an adulterer as to the second wife: thus he blends, as they say, holy with profane things; and then to adultery and lasciviousness he adds cruelty, for he holds under his authority a miserable woman, who would prefer death to such a condition; for we know what power jealousy has over women. And when any one introduces a harlot, how can a lawful wife bear such an indignity without being miserably tormented? This then is the reason why the Prophet now says, If thou hatest, dismiss ; not that he grants indulgence to divorce, as we have said, but that he might by this circumstance enhance the crime; and hence he adds, For he covers by a cloak his violence . Some interpreters take violence here for spoil or prey, and think that the wife is thus called who is tyrannically compelled to remain with an adulterer, when yet she sees a harlot in her house, by whom she is driven from her conjugal bed: but this is too strained and too remote from the letter of the text. The Prophet here, I doubt not, shakes off from the Jews their false mask, because they thought that they could cover over their vice by retaining their first wives. “What else is this,” he says, “but to cover by a cloak your violence, or at least to excuse it? for ye do not openly manifest it: but God is not deceived, nor can his eye be dazzled by such a disguise: though then your iniquity is covered by a cloak, it is not yet hid from God; nay, it is thus doubled, because ye exercise your cruelty at home; for it would be better for robbers to remain in the wood and there to kill strangers, than to entice guests to their houses and to kill them there and to plunder them under the pretext of hospitality. This is the way in which you act; for ye destroy the bond of marriage, and ye afterwards deceive your miserable wives, and yet ye force them by your tyranny to continue at your houses, and thus ye torment your miserable wives, who might have enjoyed their freedom, if divorce had been granted them.” (237) He concludes again with these words, Watch over your spirit ; that is, “Take heed; for this is an intolerable wickedness before God, however you may endeavor to extenuate its heinousness.” (236) This is not strictly correct, see Deuteronomy 24:2 ; and our Savior allows that Moses “suffered” the Israelites to put away their wives, though he says that is was for the hardness of their hearts. See Matthew 19:8 . — Ed. (237) The interpretation given of the first clause of this verse is according to the Septuagint and the Targum , and has been adopted by Cyril , Jerome , Theodoret , Drusius , Grotius , Dathius , and others. Our version is derived from Jun . and Trem., and Piscator , and has been followed by Marckius , Lowth , Scott , Adam Clarke , Newcome , and Henderson . The second clause has been variously interpreted both by the ancients and the moderns. The Septuagint make “violence,” or wrong, the nominative to “cover,” and the Targum the accusative. “Iniquity shall cover his garment,” is the version of Jerome . “For he covers violence as with his garments,” has been the version of others; which corresponds with the Targum , as the former does with the Septuagint . The most natural construction of the first part is no doubt what our version exhibits; the meaning of the second is less obvious: but they seem connected. What seems to be said is, — that God hates the divorcer, and him also who maltreats his wife without divorcing her. Then we may give this literal rendering, — For he hates the divorcer, (or him who puts away,) Saith Jehovah, the God of Israel; And the coverer of outrage on his own garment, Saith Jehovah of hosts. To speak of God here in the third person is in accordance with the preceding verses. “His own garment,” according to Venema , Dathius , and Henderson , is a figurative designation of a wife. See Ruth 3:9 ; Ezekiel 16:8 . The condemning of divorce is more suitable to this place, than any reference to its permission; because in the previous part the allusion is evidently made to the first institution of marriage, and not to

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-16

Source

여기서 선지자는 제사장들이 아무것도 아닌 것으로 여겼던 죄를 다시 부각시킨다. 아내들을 내보내는 것보다 더 심하게 죄를 지었다고 말하기 때문이다. 하나님이 이혼을 결코 진정으로 허락하지 않으셨음을 우리는 안다. 율법 아래서 벌을 받지 않았을지라도 허용된 것은 아니었기 때문이다. 그것은 마치 자신이 승인하지 않는 많은 것들을 견디어야 하는 행정관과 같은 것이었다. 그러므로 모세는 아내를 내보낸 것에 대해 죄의 심각성에 따른 형벌을 규정하지 않았다. 그러나 그것은 결코 허용되지 않았다.

비교를 한다면, 말라기는 아내를 내보내는 것이 많은 아내들을 취하는 것보다 더 가벼운 죄라고 말한다. 우리는 하나님 보시기에 일부다처가 얼마나 가증한 것인지를 배운다. 이것이 동방에서 일반적으로 행해졌다는 것은 말할 것도 없다. 그러므로 하나님이 이혼과 일부다처를 비교하실 때, 일부다처가 더 나쁘고 더 가증한 죄라고 말씀하신다. 남편이 불순하게 다른 여자와 결합하고, 그런 다음 묶여 있는 아내에게 불신실하게 대할 뿐 아니라, 강제로 그녀를 붙들어두기 때문이다. 이렇게 그의 죄가 두 배가 된다. 그가 묶여 있는 아내를 지킨다고 대답한다면, 그는 두 번째 아내에 대해서는 간음자이기 때문이다. 이렇게 그들이 말하듯이 거룩한 것과 세속적인 것을 뒤섞는다. 그런 다음 간음과 방종에 더하여 잔인함도 더한다. 비참한 여자를 자신의 권위 아래 붙들어두기 때문이다. 그 여자는 그런 상태보다 차라리 죽음을 선호할 것이다.

이것이 선지자가 이제 "만일 네가 미워하거든 버리라"고 말하는 이유이다. 이혼에 대한 관대함을 주는 것이 아니라, 이 상황으로 죄를 더 부각시키기 위해서이다. 그런 다음 그는 덧붙인다. "그는 그의 포악함을 옷으로 가리느니라." 어떤 해석자들은 여기서 폭력을 노획물 혹은 먹이, 즉 간부에게 의해 집에서 쫓겨난 아내를 의미한다고 본다. 그러나 이것은 너무 억지스럽고 글자에서 너무 멀다. 선지자는 여기서 의심할 바 없이 유대인들에게서 거짓 가면을 벗긴다. 그들이 첫 번째 아내들을 유지함으로써 자신들의 악함을 덮을 수 있다고 생각했기 때문이다.

"이것이 무엇이겠는가?" 선지자는 말한다. "너희의 폭력을 옷으로 가리는 것이 아닌가? 적어도 그것을 변명하려는 것이 아닌가? 하나님은 속지 않으신다. 그분의 눈은 그런 변장으로 흐려지지 않는다. 비록 너희의 불의가 옷으로 가려져 있을지라도, 하나님에게서 숨겨지지 않는다. 오히려 그것이 이렇게 두 배가 된다. 너희가 가정에서 잔인함을 행하기 때문이다. 강도들이 숲에 남아 이방인들을 죽이는 것보다, 손님들을 집으로 유인하여 그곳에서 죽이고 손님 대접의 명목으로 그들을 약탈하는 것이 더 나쁠 것이다. 너희가 이렇게 행한다. 혼인의 유대를 파괴하고, 너희의 비참한 아내들을 속이지만, 그들을 폭력으로 너희 집에 계속 머물도록 강요한다. 그들에게 이혼이 허용되었다면 그들의 자유를 누렸을 것인데, 너희는 그 비참한 아내들을 괴롭힌다."

그는 다시 이 말로 결론짓는다. "너희는 심령을 삼가라." 즉, "조심하라. 이것은 하나님 앞에 묵과될 수 없는 악함이다. 비록 너희가 그 심각성을 축소하려 힘쓸지라도."

원주석

17절 카드 ↗

The Prophet here reproves the Jews who expostulated with God in their adversity, as though he had undeservedly forsaken them, and had not brought them immediate help. Thus are hypocrites wont to do; unless God immediately assists them, they not only indirectly complain, but also break out into open blasphemies; for they think that God is bound to them, and hence they assail him more boldly, and even with greater freedom and insolence. It is indeed a proof of true piety when we patiently submit to the judgments of God, and when, as Jeremiah teaches us by his own example, “we sustain his wrath, because we know that we have sinned.” ( Jeremiah 3:14 .) But as hypocrites are conscious of nothing wrong, (for they flatter themselves, and stupify their own consciences,) because they examine not themselves, they think that God acts unjustly towards them when he does not immediately bring them aid. Such was the dishonesty of the people of whom the Prophet now speaks. He says that they had wearied God, that is, that they had been troublesome to him by their clamorous complaints; for the verb, יגע , igo , means to be weary; he says then that they unreasonably complained of God’s slowness. It is indeed a mode of speaking taken from men, for we know that no passions belong to God; but as elsewhere God reproves them because they saddened his Spirit, ( Psalms 106:33 ,) so he says here that they wearied him. We now perceive the Prophet’s meaning. But there is a dilemma presented in the words; for the Jews thought that God favored the wicked, inasmuch as he did not immediately punish them, or that he was now unlike himself, and forgot his own nature. The difficulty or the dilemma appears not at the first view, as they seemed to have repeated the same thing. But in the first clause they accuse God of injustice; and in the second they intimate that there is no God, for he cannot exist without exercising judgment. Then the passages contains two clauses differing from each other — “God has either changed his nature, and so is no God, or he favors our enemies; for he does not immediately execute vengeance.” We see then that they concluded that God either acted unjustly, or that there was no God. But we have mentioned the cause of this blasphemy — the Jews did not examine themselves, and therefore did not confess that they deserved these chastisements. They were like vicious horses, who kick and fling, though gently treated by their riders. But such insolence is now seen in all masked men, who vauntingly profess religion when they are treated according to their own wishes; but when God deals more sharply with them, they not only murmur, but vomit forth, as I have already said, impious slanders against him, as though he did not render to them the reward due to their just dealings. Admonished by this example, let us learn that it is true wisdom to humble ourselves under the mighty hand of God, ( 1 Peter 5:6 ;) and that though he may suspend the granting of our prayers, we ought still to bear, not impatiently, what is hard and severe, and also to subdue our feelings, and to seek from them the Spirit of meekness, to retain us in a tranquil submission. He says that they still replied — In what have we wearied thee? (238) Here he strongly reproves their hardness, because they did not become wise through the rebuke given them, but regarded with scorn the words of the Prophet, by which we clearly see that they must have been convinced of their guilt, had they not been doubly stupid. It was an intolerable reproach cast on God, to say that he favored the ungodly, and was pleased with their crimes; for God would thus not only rule as a tyrant, but also subvert all order. But nothing is more contrary to his nature than to hold forth his hand to the ungodly as though he had an alliance with them. As this then was an evident impiety, it was a monstrous stupidity to ask in what they wearied God; they ought indeed to have known that he regards nothing as precious as his own honor; and yet, as though Malachi had unjustly reproved them, they opposed him with an iron front, according to similar instances which we have before observed; for though they were covenant-breakers as to marriage, though they defrauded God in the tenths, though they cunningly evaded the Prophets, they yet as it were wiped their mouths and asked, In what had they sinned? The Prophet shows that they were become so hardened in their contumacy that they daringly rejected all admonitions; for they did not ask this as though it was a doubtful thing, nor can it be concluded from their words that they were teachable; but it was the same as if they were armed, ready for a contest, yea, armed with effrontery and perverseness; for they no doubt despised and ridiculed the Prophet’s reproof. He then answers them — When ye say, Whosoever doeth evil is acceptable in the eyes of Jehovah, and in them he delights . The word rendered “acceptable” is טוב , thub ; but such is its meaning often in Hebrew. (239) What they said was, that the ungodly and the wicked pleased God, even because they covered by false colors their sins, so that they were not convinced of anything wrong. They then imputed whatever was evil to their enemies; they did not commonly expostulate with God because he left sins unpunished, but because they received not his aid. We hence see that the Jews here did not clamor and contend with God through hatred of wickedness, but had only a regard to their own advantages; nor did they condemn the sins of others, except those by which they received some harm or loss, and that they considered none wicked except those by whom they were injured. We hence learn that they did not complain through zeal for what was right, but because they would have God bound to them to undertake their cause like earthly patrons. We indeed know that even the godly are sometimes wearied, and their faith is ready to fail, when things in the world are in a disturbed and confused state: and

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/mal-2-17

Source

선지자는 여기서 역경에서 하나님과 항의하는 유대인들을 책망한다. 마치 그분이 마땅히 그들을 버리시고 즉각적인 도움을 주지 않으신 것처럼. 이처럼 위선자들은 행동하는 것이 보통이다. 하나님이 즉시 그들을 돕지 않으시면, 그들은 간접적으로 불평할 뿐 아니라 공공연한 불경건으로 분출한다. 그들이 하나님이 자신들에게 의무가 있다고 생각하기 때문이다.

진정한 경건의 증거는 하나님의 심판들에 인내로 복종하는 것이다. 예레미야가 자신의 예로 가르치는 것처럼, "우리가 그분의 진노를 감당한다. 우리가 범죄했음을 알기 때문이다." 그러나 위선자들은 자신을 잘못했다고 의식하지 않으므로, 하나님이 즉시 도움을 주지 않으실 때 불의하게 행하신다고 생각한다.

선지자는 그들이 하나님을 피곤하게 했다고 말한다. 즉, 그들의 떠들썩한 불평으로 그분을 괴롭혔다는 것이다. 이것은 사람들에게서 빌린 말하는 방식이다. 하나님께 어떤 감정도 속하지 않는 것을 우리는 알기 때문이다. 그러나 다른 곳에서 그들이 그분의 영을 슬프게 했다고 말씀하시는 것처럼, 여기서도 그들이 그분을 피곤하게 했다고 말씀하신다.

그들의 말에 딜레마가 제시되어 있다. "하나님이 악인을 은혜롭게 여기신다. 즉시 그들을 벌하지 않으시기 때문이다." 혹은 "그분이 이제 자신과 다르게 행하시고 자신의 본성을 잊으신다." 하나님은 심판을 행사하시지 않고서는 존재하실 수 없기 때문이다. 따라서 그들은 하나님이 불의하게 행하시거나, 아니면 하나님이 없거나 둘 중 하나라고 결론지었다.

그러나 이 불경건의 원인을 우리는 언급했다 — 유대인들이 자신들을 검사하지 않았고, 그러므로 이 징계들이 마땅하다고 고백하지 않았다는 것이다. 이 예에서 교훈을 얻어, 하나님의 강한 손 아래 자신을 낮추는 것이 참된 지혜임을 배우자. 비록 그분이 우리의 기도 응답을 유보하실지라도, 어렵고 힘든 것을 인내로 감당하고, 또한 우리의 감정들을 다스려 그것들에서 고요한 복종 안에 우리를 붙들어두는 온유함의 영을 구해야 한다.

선지자는 그들이 다시 대답했다고 말한다. "우리가 어떻게 주를 피곤하게 하였나이까?" 여기서 그는 그들의 완강함을 심하게 책망한다. 주어진 책망에서 지혜롭게 되지 않고, 선지자의 말들을 비웃었기 때문이다. "악인을 행하는 자마다 여호와 보시기에 선하게 보이며 그분이 그들을 기뻐하신다고 하거나." 그들이 말한 것은 불경건한 자와 악한 자가 하나님을 기쁘게 한다는 것이었다. 그들의 죄를 거짓 색채로 덮었기 때문에 잘못된 것으로 확신하지 못했기 때문이다. 그들은 적들에게 모든 악함을 귀속시켰다.

그러므로 유대인들이 여기서 불의의 증오를 통해 하나님과 고함치고 다투지 않고, 오직 자신들의 이익에만 관심이 있었음을 본다. 그들은 어떤 손해나 손실을 받는 것들 외에는 다른 이들의 죄들을 정죄하지 않았다. 그러므로 우리는 그들이 옳은 것에 대한 열정이 아니라, 하나님이 지상의 후원자들처럼 그들의 사업을 맡아주시기를 바라는 데서 불평했다는 것을 배운다.

원주석

바이블위키 biblewiki.net · PD/CC0 · status:draft (verified 승격은 사람만) · 요약은 구조 정보만 제공하며 본문 원문을 왜곡하지 않습니다 · Karpathy LLM Wiki 패턴