Malachi: God's Love and Hate

[pelagius]

The book of Malachi is organized around six "disputes" between the Lord and Israel. I want to highlight the first one because I think it is very interesting.

A Dispute about God's Love

The first dispute is over God's love (Malachi 1:2-5):

(2) I have loved you, saith the LORD. Yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us? Was not Esau Jacob's brother? saith the LORD: yet I loved Jacob, (3) And I hated Esau, and laid his mountains and his heritage waste for the dragons* of the wilderness. (4) Whereas Edom saith, We are impoverished, but we will return and build the desolate places; thus saith the LORD of hosts, They shall build, but I will throw down; and they shall call them, The border of wickedness, and, The people against whom the LORD hath indignation for ever. (5) And your eyes shall see, and ye shall say, The LORD
will be magnified from the border of Israel.

the Lord tells Israel ``I have loved you'' and Israel answers with ``How have you loved us?'' That's the dispute. Israel feels unloved and wants God to explain in what sense He has loved them. First, I love the dispute. That it gets asked. Second, I identify with question sometimes. I not sure I've every verbalized it but I think this question has rattled around in my head a few times when people say things like "God loves you."

More interesting is the response by the Lord. He responds by referring to Jacob and Esau and saying he loved Jacob and hated Esau. I am very interested in your reaction to the explanation. It seems so stark to me and a little bit unmerciful.

First however, let me outline a little bit why the combination of the Lord and Malachi would use this image. There are lots of reasons why the Jacob-Esau metaphor would quite meaningul to the original audience of the text. The verse many be specifically reference a disaster that has befallen Edom (the descendents of Esau). What happened to Edom and how will the differences between the Lord's relationship with the two nations manifest itself? We do know that Edom was eventually invaded by the Nabataean Arabs, and evidence on Aramaic inscribed vessels suggests a date in the 6th or 5th century BCE (think of the cool buildings at the end of Indiana Jones and the Last Crusdade). Also we know that by 312 BCE Edom migrated to the Negeb because of the Nabataeans. Thus the fates of Jacob and Esau were similar. The verses (4-5) seem to imply that difference between Israel and Edom is that Israel will return and rebuild and the Lord will not allow Esau to return and rebuild.

How do you guys approach verses like these? Its pretty stark for the Lord to say he hated Esau particularly as part of argument to convince Israel of his love. How do you make sense of this or contextualize the Lord saying he hates a people? Is this where you throw your hands up and saw well the OT is a little weird or God is different in the OT (Of course, Malachi is an important prophetic book for us so maybe we should be careful about dismissing it)? Does trying to grapple with a scripture like this show a limitation to the typical LDS hermeneutic?

----------------
*jackals

[Babs]

How do you make sense of this or contextualize the Lord saying he hates a people? Is this where you throw your hands up and saw well the OT is a little weird or God is different in the OT (Of course, Malachi is an important prophetic book for us so maybe we should be careful about dismissing it)? Does trying to grapple with a scripture like this show a limitation to the typical LDS hermeneutic?

Wait! I think I know this one!

First, I assume that by "hates a people," you mean people as in nation, correct?

[pelagius]

Wait! I think I know this one!

First, I assume that by "hates a people," you mean people as in nation, correct?

I wasn't really trying to quiz anybody. Your approach seems reasonable to me but even if its is directed at the nation level does it completely overcome the problem? Personally, I still find it stark at the country level. Can't the poor edomites catch a break after all this time?

[Babs]

I wasn't really trying to quiz anybody. Your approach seems reasonable to me but even if its is directed at the nation level does it completely overcome the problem? Personally, I still find it stark at the country level. Can't the poor edomites catch a break after all this time?

Woah, I guess I wasn't very clear.

I was asking for context before I launch into my thoughts. I don't want to type four paragraphs responding to something you weren't asking. I wasn't sure specifically what you meant when you said, "when God hates a people"? Were you not referring to a people-nation, as in the nation of Edomites? If you weren't, then what were you referring to?

(Incidentally, I agree with you that the eternal persecution of the Edomites is not a very useful interpretation of this passage.)

I have to play mom right now, but in after awhile I'll post my two cents.

ps. You mean life's not a continuous string of pop quizzes? How terribly disappointing!! I suppose I can stop carrying around my #2 pencils, then.

[pelagius]

I was asking for context before I launch into my thoughts. I don't want to type four paragraphs responding to something you weren't asking. I wasn't sure specifically what you meant when you said, "when God hates a people"? Were you not referring to a people-nation, as in the nation of Edomites?

I was primarily ... I didn't want to put to much structure on it because I would be interested if others viewed it differently in terms of what was meant by the edomites or the reference to Esau.

For whatever reason I wrongly interpreted you to be suggesting that by itself the nation level approach got rid of any problems. Sorry about that.

[creekster]

I thought it was like Catherine SHorten and me in 7th grade. After taking her to the big dance she tehn refused to talk to me, for fear of being tricked into another 'sort of' date. So, after I tried a couple of more times, I had no choice but to admit ot my firned Erich that she hated me. It was clear she hated me, and I was pretty upset about it.

Catherine didn't really hate me, but she sure wasn't going to help me, and becasue I had acted like such a dweeb she had cut me off from her affections and it sure looked like she hated me, but she didn't, really.

I thought it was like that.

[SoCalCoug]

I went to the Biblos.com lexicon just to see if there's a softer interpretation of "hate" in this context. Actually, it seems to be an extremely strong connotation: "to hate (personally) -- enemy, foe, (be) hate(-ful, -r), odious, utterly." Also, "dragons" is translated as female jackals, which gives imagery of leaving Esau for dead in the desert for the scavengers.

It is, indeed, very stark. Could it be in the nature of an exaggeration, to contextualize how much love God has for Israel?

I think it's really hard to understand these sorts of metaphors with the western mind.

[pelagius]

.
It is, indeed, very stark. Could it be in the nature of an exaggeration, to contextualize how much love God has for Israel?

I think it's really hard to understand these sorts of metaphors with the western mind.

I like that one. Malachi uses antithetical parallelism; Jacob and Esau and Love and Hate. MY guess is that Israelites really did hate the edomites at the time. Hence it becomes a very powerful contrast. The Lord loves you as a people as much as you (or the Lord) hates the Edomites (implicit in this may be that Malachi is inspired but a product of his times so describing the Lord as hating edom is not problematic theologically for him). Maybe an ancient version of saying "I love you to the moon and back?" Envoking Jacob and Esau also brings into play that this notion should be understand in terms of the covenant relationship.

[pelagius]

I thought it was like Catherine SHorten and me in 7th grade. After taking her to the big dance she tehn refused to talk to me, for fear of being tricked into another 'sort of' date. So, after I tried a couple of more times, I had no choice but to admit ot my firned Erich that she hated me. It was clear she hated me, and I was pretty upset about it.

Catherine didn't really hate me, but she sure wasn't going to help me, and becasue I had acted like such a dweeb she had cut me off from her affections and it sure looked like she hated me, but she didn't, really.

I thought it was like that.

Are you saying: Since the context is covenant love that love in this situation means "chosen" and hate means "rejected or not chosen" and this is implied by the antithetical parallelism and the covenantal context?

[creekster]

Are you saying: Since the context is the covenant love that love in this situation means "chosen" and hate means "rejected or not chosen" and this is implied by the antithetical parallelism and the covenantal context?

Ummm, Yes?

[pelagius]

Ummm, Yes?

I saw your turned down at the dance and having to go to great lengths to make sure you didn't try again thing as an analog to Esau's blunders when it came to the covenant. Did I overreach?

[creekster]

I saw your turned down at the dance and having to go to great lengths to make sure you didn't try again thing as an analog to Esau's blunders when it came to the covenant. Did I overreach?

In general that is what I was trying to say, but you may have given me more credit than I deserved.

The story is true, btw.

[pelagius]

In general that is what I was trying to say, but you may have given me more credit than I deserved.

The story is true, btw.

I like your approach here ... My main worry is the issue pointed out by SoCal. Can we get away with such softening given the language and imagery?

[Babs]

I like your approach here ... My main worry is the issue pointed out by SoCal. Can we get away with such softening given the language and imagery?

no, you can't.

The question is to whom is such raw, violent animosity directed? And for what purpose?

[Babs]

Here's my take:

The Edomites had aligned with Nebuchadnezzar in sacking Jerusalem. The Edomites are public enemy number one as far as the Jews are concerned. There's also a sense of betrayal among the Israelites, "What do you mean you love us? How could you have let this happen to us?"

Now, this is over a century after the fall of Jerusalem, but the Israelites are still devastated from the fall, and trying to rebuild Jerusalem and restore the nation of Judah. But it's not going terribly well. The Jews are discouraged, disillusioned, and disorganized. They've been fooling around with polytheism; they've been unfaithful to the LORD; they're really a mess.

Ezra and others want to restore the Jews to the old law. But how can they convince the people that there's any worth in returning to the law? What's in it for them? Well, the people want very much to believe that -- in spite of the fall of Jerusalem a hundred years earlier -- they are still the chosen people, and the Edomites' victory was only temporary. Enter the author of Malachi. Suddenly full honor and glory is promised to the Jews if they return to faithful service of the LORD.

But is this promise of future glory going to be enough to bring the people back to the fold? Maybe not. Perhaps we'd better break out the big guns.

If you notice, the book both begins and ends with destruction. This isn't coincidence. The book opens with the promise of the future destruction of the Edomites, and ends with the threat of destruction of an unfaithful Israel. Now keep in mind, at this point in time, to compare someone with an Edomite is the foulest of all insults. You want to really hit somebody below the belt -- even worse than calling him fatherless, or a dog, or a woman -- you suggest he's of Esau. So the idea that if the Israelites continue to stray from the LORD, they will become essentially indistinguishable from the Edomites -- now that's a powerful motivator to return to the law.

So why was this constructed the way it was for its contemporary audience?
1. In "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated," we have the reassurance that the people crave that, in spite of current and recent difficulties, they are still God's chosen people.
2. In the promised destruction of the Edomites that follows, we're setting up a motif that will recur at the end of the book and resonate powerfully with the people.
3. These together combine to motivate the populace to return to faithfulness.

-

But, perhaps this is all an aside. After all, we're not Israelites. So the question is, what does this mean now?

Well, the Israelites would have interpreted this book in a contemporary context, so they would have taken Jacob and Esau, and Israel and Edom, at face value. But what if you're looking for an inspired meaning? For a meaning relevant to readers a couple of millennia later?

Well, we don't have to reinvent the wheel. Paul already interpreted this in Romans 9.

For I could wish that I myself were cursed and cut off from Christ for the sake of my brothers, those of my own race, the people of Israel. Theirs is the adoption as sons; theirs the divine glory, the covenants, the receiving of the law, the temple worship and the promises. Theirs are the patriarchs, and from them is traced the human ancestry of Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.

Why did God hate Esau? Why does God hate Edom? "Can't Edom catch a break?"

Well, no, it can't. But not because of its nationality. It's because of what it represents.

Why does God hate Esau?
Because he defied the law and rejected his birthright.

Why did God hate Edom?
He didn't hate the nation. He hated what the nation represents. The Edomites rejected the God of Israel. They destroyed His temple.

So when the LORD says He's going to bring about the destruction of Edom, He's not talking about the nation herself. He's saying He's going to bring about the destruction of all those who reject Him -- that is, the nation of unbelievers.