Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
Early Christians linked the sacrifice of the Eucharist with the sacrifice described in Malachi 1. In the King James Version, this passage relevant reads
10 … I have no pleasure in you, saith the Lord of hosts, neither will I accept an offering at your hand. 11 For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts. 12 But ye have profaned it, in that ye say, The table of the Lord is polluted; and the fruit thereof, even his meat, is contemptible. 13 Ye said also, Behold, what a weariness is it! and ye have snuffed at it, saith the Lord of hosts; and ye brought that which was torn, and the lame, and the sick; thus ye brought an offering: should I accept this of your hand? saith the Lord. 14 But cursed be the deceiver, which hath in his flock a male, and voweth, and sacrificeth unto the Lord a corrupt thing: for I am a great King, saith the Lord of hosts, and my name is dreadful among the heathen.
The Didache 14, ca. 90 AD:
But every Lord’s day gather yourselves together, and break bread, and give thanksgiving after having confessed your transgressions, that your sacrifice may be pure. But let no one that is at variance with his fellow come together with you, until they be reconciled, that your sacrifice may not be profaned. For this is that which was spoken by the Lord: In every place and time offer to me a pure sacrifice; for I am a great King, says the Lord, and my name is wonderful among the nations.
Justin Martyr, Dialogue with Trypho 41, ca. 155 AD:
Hence God speaks by the mouth of Malachi, one of the twelve [prophets], as I said before, about the sacrifices at that time presented by you: "I have no pleasure in you, says the Lord; and I will not accept your sacrifices at your hands: for, from the rising of the sun unto the going down of the same, My name has been glorified among the Gentiles, and in every place incense is offered to My name, and a pure offering: for My name is great among the Gentiles, says the Lord: but you profane it." [So] He then speaks of those Gentiles, namely us, who in every place offer sacrifices to Him, i.e., the bread of the Eucharist, and also the cup of the Eucharist, affirming both that we glorify His name, and that you profane [it].
However, the New Jerome Biblical Commentary has the following to say:
incense is offered: Verbal and nominal forms based on the root qtr, like muqtar [H6999] here, have to do with any kind of offering which gives off smoke, but in postexilic texts precise enough to let us see what is being offered they have to do with incense or other aromatic substances. The ptc. muggas can be used of bringing any type of offering before God.
pure offering: Hebr tahor [H2889] in a cultic context means "pure" in the sense of being free from all that ritually defiles; the contrast with the blemished animals sacrificed by the priests of Jerusalem is thus clear. The word minha [H4503] as a technical cultic term designates a cereal offering (Lev 2); of itself, the word means a pleasant "gift"…
It will be noted that none of these cultic terms has to do with animal sacrifice, although the practice they describe is being compared with contemporary Israelite practice of animal sacrifice. This verse has received the most attention through the centuries. Many have taken it as referring specifically to the future Christian eucharistic sacrifice, or to the sacrifice on the cross, or to the quality of sacrifice less specifically in the future messianic era. It is difficult to take the literal sense as having reference to the future. It is made up of nominal clauses, without any finite vb., and the ptc. muggas, "offered" cannot by itself give these clauses future reference any more than do the ptcs. in v 12, whose time reference is clearly present. …
Taken at face value, this verse contrasts the offensive sacrificial abuse (involving animals) in Jerusalem with the pleasing oblatory practice (even without sacrificial animals) everywhere else in the world. Pagans at least show the right disposition; Judeans cheat Yahweh. To the objection that so favorable a view of worship among all nations is not consonant with Mal’s particularism one may reply that the direct purpose of this view is not that of praising pagan worship but rather that of shaming the priests of Judah by contrasting the quality of offerings to divinity everywhere else. That pagan offerings are everywhere ritually pure and that pagans everywhere give worship to the name of Yahweh are, in context, less statements of fact than they are rhetorical exaggerations meant to shame the Judeans. They move a step further than the universal acknowledgment of Yahweh enunciated in v 14.
Some translations seem to agree in part with the bolded portion above. Translations like the Douay-Rheims, RSV, and NAB have the indicative is where the KJV has the future shall be in v. 11. The ESV and HCSB preserve the future tense, but indicate that that the present tense may be acceptable in footnotes; other modern translations like the NIV and NASB also retain the future tense.
So, my question is how the Hebrew in v. 11 should be translated. Is the exegesis found in the New Jerome Biblical Commentary sound, and is it correct in asserting that the passage has no future or prophetic context? If this is the case, whence the future tense in several translations? It is indisputable that the early Church linked this verse with the Eucharist; were they simply incorrect in assuming that it indicated anything to be fulfilled?
