SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 2007 – Page 2

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 3:13

3:13a

Your words against Me have been harsh: The Hebrew expression which the Berean Standard Bible translates as have been harsh has the basic meaning of “to be strong.” In this verse it applies to Your words, and refers to words that are “terrible/severe.” English versions express this idea in different ways. For example:

You have said harsh things against me. (New International Version)
-or-
You have said terrible things about me. (Good News Translation)
-or-
You have criticised me sharply. (NET Bible)

Express this meaning in a natural way in your language.

3:13b

says the LORD: See the note on 1:2b.

© 2007 by SIL International®
Made available under the terms of a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA) creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0.
All Scripture quotations in this publication, unless otherwise indicated, are from The Holy Bible, Berean Standard Bible.
BSB is produced in cooperation with Bible Hub, Discovery Bible, OpenBible.com, and the Berean Bible Translation Committee.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 2:9

2:9a

So: The Hebrew particle w- used here introduces the result of the priests’ disobeying the LORD (2:8).

I in turn have made you despised and humiliated before all the people: This may be translated as, “I will cause all the people ⌊of Israel⌋ to despise you and regard you as being worthless.”

despised: There is an implied passive idea here. This is the same verb used in 1:6f, 1:7c and 1:12c. The priests had despised the LORD and the sacrifices which they should be making to him. In the same way, the LORD would cause them to be despised by other people.

humiliated: This is also an implied passive. The priests would be considered humiliated by other people. That is, people were going to consider the priests to be vile, to have a shameful character.

There are at least two possibilities for translating these two verbs:

• Keep the implied passive. For example:

I…have made you contemptible and vile to the whole people. (New Jerusalem Bible)

• Make the idea active with a subject like “people.” For example:

I…will make the people of Israel despise you. (Good News Translation)

Use an option which is natural in your language to express the meaning.

2:9b

because: The Hebrew expression which the Berean Standard Bible translates as because means “to the extent that.” Here it compares 2:9a with 2:9b. The LORD will cause the priests to be despised to the extent that they have not kept his ways and have shown partiality in their instruction. In this verse, the expression acts like a reason connector.

Use what would be natural in your language in this context.

you have not kept My ways: That is, you have not obeyed my instructions/laws. The same Hebrew word for ways was used in 2:8a.

2:9c

but have shown partiality in matters of the law: This part of the verse indicates that the priests were unfair to certain people in the way that they applied the law of God when they made decisions. For example, as priests, they decided whether an animal was too blemished to be acceptable for sacrifice. When they made such decisions, they treated some people better than others. Some ways to express this in English are:

You have been unfair when ⌊applying⌋ my teachings. (God’s Word)
-or-
you…have shown partiality in your interpretation of the law. (New Living Translation (2004))
-or-
you…show partiality in your rulings. (Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures)

matters of the law: The Hebrew word which the Berean Standard Bible translates as matters of the law is the same word that was translated as “instruction” in 2:6a, 2:7b, 2:8b. Here it refers specifically to the way that the priests interpreted God’s law as they made decisions that affected people’s lives.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 4:6

4:6a

And: The word And in the Berean Standard Bible translates the Hebrew conjunction w-. Here it introduces what the person who will be like Elijah will do when he comes. Many English versions omit the word. Use what is natural in your language here.

he will turn the hearts of the fathers to their children: This means that the one who will be like Elijah will help fathers reconcile with their children. Fathers will have feelings of love for their children again.

4:6b

and the hearts of the children to their fathers: This clause repeats the main idea of 4:6a from the children’s point of view. Some of the information is implied. The full idea is: “and ⌊he will turn⌋ the hearts of children to their fathers ⌊also ⌋. ” In some languages it may be necessary to repeat the implied information here. For example:

He will help fathers reconcile with their children, and ⌊he will also help⌋ children reconcile with their fathers.

4:6c

Otherwise: The Hebrew conjunction which the Berean Standard Bible translates as Otherwise introduces a warning. Here are some other ways to express this in English:

lest I come and smite the land with a curse. (Revised Standard Version)
-or-

so that I will not come and strike the earth with judgment. (NET Bible)
-or-

If not, I will come and reclaim my land by destroying you. (God’s Word)

Use a natural way to express the warning in your language.

strike the land with a curse: The Hebrew word which the Berean Standard Bible translates as curse refers to the most severe type of curse among the Hebrews. This is a different Hebrew word than the one that was used in 2:2 and 3:9. This word means that the person or thing which is cursed must be totally destroyed. In this verse, the LORD indicated that if people did not change as described in 4:6a–b, he would totally destroy the land of Israel.

In some languages this meaning must be made explicit. For example:

otherwise I would have to come and destroy your country. (Good News Translation)

strike: The Hebrew word which the Berean Standard Bible translates as strike can be translated as “smite,” “destroy,” or “punish.”

the land: This refers to the land of Israel.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 1:2

Section 1:2–5

The LORD loved the people of Israel very much

Paragraph 1:2–5

At the time when Malachi was writing, the people of Israel were discouraged. Some years earlier their enemies, the Babylonians, had defeated them in war and had taken them as slaves to Babylon.

After some time the people of Israel had been released and were now living again in their own land, but life was very difficult. Perhaps they felt that the LORD had failed to bless them as a nation. They questioned whether the LORD really loved them. The LORD answered this accusation by pointing out that he had chosen to love them more than other nations. He told them that he had shown this love when he chose their ancestor Jacob and entered into a covenant relationship with him and his descendants (Genesis 28:13–15, 35:9–12, 46:3–4).

1:2a

I have loved you: This is the first of the LORD’s statements of fact.

have loved: The tense of the verb “love” used here in Hebrew is not limited to present time. It can include past time as well as a present. Good News Translation makes this clear with:

I have always loved you. (Good News Translation)

1:2b

says the LORD: The speech clause, says the LORD (or “says the LORD of Hosts”), occurs many times throughout the text. This emphasizes repeatedly that this is a direct message from the LORD. See note 1 in “Literary structure and recurring features in Malachi” in the Introduction.

Notice that in the Berean Standard Bible this clause occurs after the speech. This is good English style. You should place your speech clause wherever it would naturally occur in your language.

1:2c

But you ask: This phrase introduces the first of the objections made by the people of Israel. Most English versions keep the second person pronoun you. This emphasizes the personal relationship which the LORD had with his people.

How have You loved us?: This question expresses surprise and disbelief.

1:2d

Was not Esau Jacob’s brother?: This is a rhetorical question. The LORD was speaking again. By using the question form, the LORD emphasized a fact that the people knew well. Esau and Jacob were children of the same father and the same mother. (In fact, they were twins. See Genesis 25:21–26.)

declares the LORD: See the note on 1:2b. Notice that in the Berean Standard Bible this speech clause again occurs after the question. This is good English style. You should place it wherever it would naturally occur in your language.

1:2e–3a

loved…hated: The Hebrew word which the Berean Standard Bible translates as hated needs to be understood in contrast to the word which the Berean Standard Bible translates as loved. In this context loved means “chosen,” “favored” (as in Deuteronomy 7:7–8; Jeremiah 31:3; Hosea 11:1), while hated is the opposite: “not chosen,” “rejected” or “set aside.” Jacob had been chosen to be the ancestor of the LORD’s special people. By choosing Jacob, the LORD, therefore, was not choosing Jacob’s twin brother, Esau.

In some languages it may be best to use words like “choose” and “reject.” For example:

yet I have accepted Jacob and have rejected Esau. (Tanakh: The Holy Scriptures)
-or-
yet I chose Jacob, and rejected Esau. (NET Bible)

Jacob…Esau: This verse is not referring only to the individuals, Jacob and Esau, but also to their descendants. Jacob was the ancestor of the nation of Israel, and Esau was the ancestor of a different nation. In some languages it may be necessary to make this explicit. For example:

2 Esau and Jacob were brothers, but I have loved Jacob and his descendants, 3 and have hated Esau and his descendants. (Good News Translation)

General Comment on 1:2e–3a

In some languages it may be helpful to reverse the order of 1:2e and 1:3a. For example:

3a but it was not Esau whom I chose ⌊to be the ancestor of my people.⌋ 2e ⌊Instead,⌋ I chose Jacob ⌊and his descendants⌋.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 3:3

3:3a

a refiner and purifier of silver: This phrase uses the same type of metaphor as 3:2c used. In this verse there is no difference in meaning between refiner and purifier.

3:3b

the sons of Levi: Since all priests were descendants of Levi, the sons of Levi included the priests. It also included other descendants of Levi who served in the temple in other ways.

If your readers do not know this, they will not understand the argument here. There are two ways to supply the information:

• Use the term “priests” in the text, as Good News Translation has done:

• Use a footnote.

3:3d

Then: The Hebrew conjunction w- is translated by the Berean Standard Bible as Then. Here it introduces the result of 3:3b–c. Other English versions translate it with “so that” or “till” (short for “until”). For example:

the LORD’s messenger will purify the priests, so that they will bring to the Lord the right kind of offerings. (Good News Translation)
-or-
he will purify Levi’s sons and refine them like gold and silver, till they present right offerings to the Lord. (Revised Standard Version)

Use what is natural in your language here.

they will present offerings to the LORD in righteousness: The Hebrew phrase which the Berean Standard Bible translates as present offerings…in righteousness can have two possible interpretations here:

(1) The phrase in righteousness qualifies offerings. This refers to offerings that are the sort of offering that the LORD had told his people to bring, that is, unblemished offerings. For example:

Then they will offer the Lord a proper offering. (NET Bible)

(2) The phrase in righteousness is adverbial, and it indicates the correct way to present offerings. This refers to the way the people were to present their offerings; that is, they were to present them in the proper way, as the LORD had told them to. For example:

and so they will be fit to bring offerings to the Lord. (Revised English Bible)

It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1).

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 1:13

1:13a

You also say: Notice that the Berean Standard Bible and the Hebrew have placed this speech clause at the beginning of 1:13a. In other languages it may be necessary to place it at the end of the verse.

Oh, what a nuisance: Here the LORD described the attitude of the priests towards the sacrificial system he had given them. They thought of it as a burden and they were bored with it.

1:13b

And you turn up your nose at it: There is a textual problem with this part of the verse. There are two possibilities:

(1) Follow the Hebrew texts that can be translated as “sniff at it.”

(2) Follow the Hebrew texts that can be translated as “sniff at me.”

It is recommended that you follow option (1).

turn up your nose at: That is, degrade or treat contemptuously. In some languages there may be a suitable idiom to express this idea.

it: This refers to the altar (the LORD’s table) and the sacrificial system.

1:13c

says the LORD of Hosts: See the note on 1:6e.

the LORD of Hosts: See the note on 1:4d and 1:6e. Translate this term in the same way here.

1:13d

offerings that are stolen: The Hebrew word which the Berean Standard Bible translates as offerings that are stolen can have several meanings. The two most common possibilities here are:

(1) It refers to animals which someone stole or seized by force. This is the most common meaning of the Hebrew word. For example:

you bring a stolen animal. (Good News Translation)

(2) It refers to animals which had been attacked and injured. God did not accept injured or mutilated animals as sacrifices (Exodus 22:31). For example:

you bring injured…animals. (New International Version)

It is recommended that you follow option (1).

1:13e

lame, or sick: These were categories of animals which were not allowed as sacrifices. See the note on 1:8c.

1:13f

Should I accept these from your hands?: This is a rhetorical question. It is an emphatic way to say that such offerings were unacceptable to the LORD. If your language would not use a rhetorical question to express this meaning, you may use a statement. For example:

You bring them as gifts, but I won’t accept them from you. (New Century Version)

from your hands: The Hebrew expression which the Berean Standard Bible translates as from your hands means “from you.” The same Hebrew expression was used in 1:9b and 1:10e.

1:13g

asks the LORD: See the note on 1:2b.

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 3:14

3:14b

It is futile to serve God: That is, it is pointless/useless to serve God. This is a return to the topic which had caused God to be upset with the people (see 2:17).

to serve God: Here to serve means “to worship, to behave in a proper way towards God.”

3:14c

keeping His requirements: That is, obeying his commandments.

3:14d

walking mournfully: That is, the people were “behaving as those who are truly sorry for the sins they have committed.” This implied that they had truly repented and were obeying the LORD once more. It contrasts with 3:15a, which mentions “the arrogant” people.

General Comment on 3:14c–d

In 3:14c–d the people asked a rhetorical question. The question emphasizes the idea in 3:14b and adds further details. If you would not use a question in that way in your language, it may be better to use a statement. For example:

14a You have said, 14b “It is useless to serve God. 14c It did no good to obey his laws 14d and to show the Lord All-Powerful that we were sorry for what we did.” (New Century Version)

SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 2:10

Section 2:10–16

Malachi rebuked the people of Israel because they had been unfaithful to the LORD

This section contains the central message of the book. It highlights its main theme: that is, that both the priests and the people had been unfaithful to the LORD. The LORD here called them to repent and to follow him again.

This section lists three specific ways in which the people of Israel as a nation had broken their covenant with the LORD:

(a) They had married wives who worshipped foreign gods.

(b) They had been unfaithful to their wives.

Also the people had been hypocritical. They asked the LORD to help them in order to show that they trusted him. Yet, at the same time, they continued to be unfaithful to him and to disobey him.

The Hebrew word bagad which means “faithless, treacherous” occurs five times in these verses. The repeated use of the word highlights both the unfaithfulness of the people to the LORD and their unfaithfulness to their wives.

This section contains one of the few places in the book in which it was the prophet himself who addressed the people. The prophet rebuked the people of Israel because they had been unfaithful to the LORD. He began his rebuke with a series of rhetorical questions. The first two questions in this section form a doublet, which makes an emphatic beginning, and all the questions indicate strong feeling.

Paragraph 2:10–12

2:10

As stated in the introduction to this section, in this verse and those following, it is the prophet himself who was speaking. The content of 2:10 makes this clear.

However there is no marker in Hebrew to indicate that it is no longer the LORD who was speaking (1:2–2:9) but Malachi. In some languages it may be necessary to make this explicit in some way. There are at least three possibilities:

• Indicate it in the section heading, as the section heading in these Notes has done:

Malachi rebuked the people of Israel because they had been unfaithful to the LORD.

• Use a footnote to explain that 2:10–15 are the words of Malachi.

• Make it explicit in the text. For example, you could begin 2:10 with a phrase like:

These are the words of Malachi:

I, Malachi, ask you:

Malachi said:

Use the option which is most appropriate in your language.

2:10a

Do we not all have one Father?: Here we refers to the people of Israel, not to human beings in general. Malachi identified himself with the rest of the people of Israel when he used the pronoun we here.

This is the first rhetorical question which Malachi himself used. He wanted to emphasize what he was saying by asserting something that his hearers all knew to be true. The question expects the answer “yes.” If you do not use rhetorical questions like this in your language, you can reword it as a strong positive statement. Here is one example:

⌊ You know⌋ that we all have one Father.

one Father: This refers to God. The Contemporary English Version makes this explicit:

Don’t you know that we all have God as our Father? (Contemporary English Version)

2:10b

Did not one God create us?: This is Malachi’s second rhetorical question and again it expects the answer “yes.” One way to express this as a positive statement would be:

⌊ You know⌋ that the same God created us.

General Comment on 2:10a–b

Notice that 2:10a and 2:10b say almost the same thing. The ideas are also arranged in a special pattern called a “chiasm.”

Do we not all have one Father ?

Did not one God create us ?

The parallelism and the chiasm indicate that these verse parts express an important idea in the text.

2:10c–d

Scholars interpret the connection between 2:10c and 2:10d in at least three ways:

(1) The statement in 2:10d explains the result of the people’s unfaithfulness to each other in 2:10c. They were unfaithful to each other, and, as a result, they profaned the covenant. For example:

Why do we deal treacherously each against his brother so as to profane the covenant of our fathers? (New American Standard Bible)

(2) The statements in 2:10c and 2:10d are two different ways that the people were displeasing God. For example:

Then why do we break our promises to one another, and why do we despise the covenant that God made with our ancestors? (Good News Translation)

(3) The statement in 2:10d indicates the way that the people had been unfaithful. They had been unfaithful by profaning the covenant. For example:

Then why do you cheat each other by breaking the agreement God made with your ancestors? (Contemporary English Version)

Some English versions are ambiguous about the connection. It is recommended that you follow interpretation (1).

See also the general comment on 2:10c–d for a reordering suggestion.

2:10c

Why then do we break faith with one another…?: That is, why do we (the people of Israel) not keep our commitments and promises to one another? This rhetorical question introduces the following verses, which describe ways that the people of Israel had been unfaithful to God’s commands. They had also been unfaithful to each other, especially in breaking their marriage vows.

then: The Berean Standard Bible has included the word then to show the relationship between 2:10c and the preceding questions in 2:10a–b. Those questions imply that the people should have been united because God was the father and creator of all of them. However 2:10c states that instead they were unfaithful to each other. Malachi did not expect them to act that way.

In some languages it may be necessary to make the expectation explicit. Languages have different ways to show that something was different from what the speaker expected. Here are some possibilities for translation:

• Use a connector which implies this. For example:

So why do people break their promises to each other…? (New Century Version)

• Refer to the preceding question to show the connection. For example:

Since that is true, why are we unfaithful to each other?

• Make Malachi’s expectation explicit. For example:

⌊ Because of this, you should have been faithful to each other.⌋ Why have you been unfaithful ⌊instead⌋…?

Use the option which is most appropriate in your language.

break faith: The Hebrew word bagad which the Berean Standard Bible translates as break faith is the key word in this section. See the discussion at the beginning of Section 2:10–16. This word describes the way the people of Israel behaved in all their relationships:

(a) they broke their promises to each other (2:10),

(b) they broke their promises to their wives (2:14–15) and

2:10d

so as to profane the covenant of our fathers: This statement explains the result of 2:10c. When the people were unfaithful to each other, they profaned the covenant.

profane: That is, disregard/disobey/violate.

the covenant of our fathers: This refers to the covenant which God made with the ancestors of the people of Israel. It may be necessary to make this explicit in some translations. This has been done in 2:10d in the Display.

General Comment on 2:10c–d

In some languages it may be more natural to change the order of these verse parts. Notice that it may be necessary then to use a different connector between 2:10c and 2:10d. For example:

10d Why do we profane the covenant of our fathers 10c by breaking faith with one another? (New International Version)

Search

Step into the multitudes of languages of the Bible and join the worldwide conversation!

Source: SIL Translator’s Notes on Malachi 2007