Malachi 2:15

And did not he make one?.... That is, did not God make one man, and out of his rib one woman? did he not make man, male and female? did he not make one pair, one couple, only Adam and Eve, whom he joined together in marriage?

And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.

And did he, God our Creator, not make one, but one man and one woman? Yet had he the residue of the spirit; yet he could have made more men and women; and if it had been good, and well-pleasing to him, he could have made many women for one man; but though by his power he could, yet in his wisdom, goodness, and holiness he would not make more; from the beginning marriage was ordained to be between one man and one woman alone at once. So Christ argued . And wherefore one, one couple, and no more? That he might seek a godly seed; or, a seed of God; either an excellent seed, as the Hebrew expresses the excellency of a thing by the addition of the name God to it; or rather a holy seed, born to God in chaste wedlock, and brought up under the instructions and virtuous examples of parents living in the fear of God, and love of each other, which in polygamy cannot be expected. Take heed to your spirit; keep your heart from wandering after strange wives, as you tender your life and souls. Let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth; though many have done so, let none now do it any more.

Malachi 2:15 And did not he make one? Yet had he the residue of the spirit. And wherefore one? That he might seek a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.Ver. 15. And did not he make one] Another forcible argument against polygamy and adultery. See our Saviour’ s explanation of it, Matthew 19:4-6. The only wise God made but one woman for one man at the first creation; and ordained that those two should be one flesh, two in one flesh, not three or four, or as many wives as a man is able to maintain, as among the Turks, who, as a just hand of God upon them, are grievously vexed with jealousy, not suffering their women to go to church, nor so much as look out at their own windows; or, if they go abroad upon any occasion, they must go muffled, all but the eyes. Sardus tells us, that the old Britons would ten or twelve of them take one woman to wife. Likely, women were rare commodities, with them. As likewise men were in Judaea, when "seven women took hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel; only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach," Isaiah 4:1 : that is, we will maintain ourselves and thee; only be thou a husband to us, and let us have children by thee. Yet had he the residue of the spirit] Or, breath; so that he could as easily have made more, and breathed into their faces the breath of life. And although it is not said of the woman, that God breathed into her the breath of life, as of Adam (whence Tertullian concludes, that she had both body and soul too from Adam), yet Austin rightly gathereth, that their souls were both alike imbreathed by God; otherwise, the Scripture would not have been silent in it, no more than it is in the new manner of the creation of her body. Thence also it is that Adam saith not, This is soul of my soul, but "bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh," Genesis 2:23. Souls are not propagated by the parents, but created of God, and joined to the body, by a hidden or secret operation. Augustine, following Origen, held the contrary for a long time. At length he began to doubt, and after a while changed his opinion; Jerome stoutly defending the contrary against him. Aristotle also understood the truth hereof, and concluded, that the soul was divine, and came from above; and though of nothing, yet is it made a matter more excellent than the matter of the heavens, in nature not inferior to the angels. Lειπεταιδετοννουνμονονθυραθενεπειστεναικαιθειονειναιμονον. Lib. 2, c. 9. An abridgment it is of the invisible world, as the body is of the visible.

(10-17) The prophet now rebukes the two great sins of the nation at this time: (1) marriage with idolatresses; (2) divorce of the first (Israelitish) wife. He introduces this rebuke by a general statement, similar to that of Mal 1:2.

Verse 15. And did not he make one?] ONE of each kind, Adam and Eve. Yet had he the residue of the Spirit; he could have made millions of pairs, and inspired them all with living souls. Then wherefore one? He made one pair from whom all the rest might proceed, that he might have a holy offspring; that children being a marked property of one man and one woman, proper care might be taken that they should be brought up in the discipline of the Lord. Perhaps the holy or godly seed, זרע אלהים zera Elohim, a seed of God, may refer to the MESSIAH. God would have the whole human race to spring from one pair, that Christ, springing from the same family, might in his sufferings taste death for every man; because he had that nature that was common to the whole human race. Had there been several heads of families in the beginning, Jesus must have been incarnated from each of those heads, else his death could have availed for those only who belonged to the family of which he was incarnated. Take heed to your spirit] Scrutinize the motives which induce you to put away your wives.

15. did not he make one?] The interpretation of this very difficult verse follows in the main, though with some variety of detail, one or other of two lines. (1) By “one” here Abraham is held to be intended, who is called “one” in Isaiah 51:2 (lit. “for one I called him”; “I called him alone”, A.V.; “when he was but one I called him”, R.V.), and in Ezekiel 33:24 (“Abraham was one”). The words are thus regarded as spoken by the Jews, who seek to shelter themselves from the prophet’s censure under the example of Abraham. “Did not one (Abraham)”, say they, “do it (that of which you complain in us, when he took to wife Hagar, the Egyptian)? And yet he had the residue of the spirit” (comp. Numbers 27:18 : “Joshua, the son of Nun, a man in whom is the spirit”). “And wherefore”, the prophet replies, “(did) the one (do it)? He was seeking (not as you are the gratification of his lust, but) a seed of God” (the son whom God had promised him. Genesis 16:2). “Therefore”, seeing that Abraham’s example avails you nothing, “take head.” If this, however, were the argument, we might have expected the prophet to reply, that so far from divorcing (as they were doing) his proper wife, it was Hagar and not Sarah whom Abraham sent away, so soon as disagreement arose. (2) The other line of interpretation is that adopted in A.V. and retained in R.V. According to it the prophet recalls them (as our Lord does in His argument with the Jews on the same subject, Mark 10:2-9) to the original institution of marriage and relation of the sexes. “Did not He (God) make one (one man, and out of him one woman, and the twain ‘one flesh’)? And (yet) the residue of the spirit (of life, comp. Genesis 7:22 : ‘the breath of the spirit of life’) was His (so that He could, had it pleased Him, have created, for example, one man and many women). And why (did He make) the one? He sought (what only by the purity and integrity of the marriage bond can be secured) a godly seed.”

And did not He - , God, of whom he had spoken as the witness between man and his wife, “make one,” namely, Adam first, to mark the oneness of marriage and make it a law of nature, appointing “that

Malachi 2:15 b is an exhortation to discontinue the practices condemned in Malachi 2:14.